dDooern 
(idysticism 


SDEALEL 


a 4) 
WS 4 4 


= a ee a ee 


Compliments of 
DAVIDSGN COLLEGE. 


eo 
ety 


DAVIDSON COLLEGE DIVINITY LECTURES, 
OTTS FOUNDATION. 
THIRD SERIES. MDCCCCV. 


Modern Mysticism; 


OR, 


The Covenants of the Spirit, 


Their Scope and Limitations. 


ere. 
Rev. J. B. SHEARER, D.D., LL. D., 


Professor of Biblical Instruction, 
Davidson College, N.C. 


als 


RICHMOND, VA.: 
PRESBYTERIAN COMMITTEE OF PUBLICATION. 


CopyrRIGHT 
BY: 
R. E. MAGILL, Secretary of Publication, 


1905. 


PRINTED BY 
Wuuittrt & SHEPPERSON, 


RICHMOND, VA. 


EXPLANATION. 


Dae tate Rev: J.oM. PF. -Otts’ De De LEY Di taediee 
tinguished alumnus of Davidson College, and also an 
honored trustee, made a generous donation to the College 
for the purpose of founding a lectureship at Davidson 
College, the interest to be used from time to time to secure 
and publish courses of lectures, “in defense of the truths 
of the Bible and Christianity against some form of unbe- 
lief that may be prevalent at the time of delivery of any 
course of lectures.” 

The first series of lectures was delivered by Dr. Otts, 
and published: Unsettled Questions Touching the Foun- 
dations of Christianity. A book for thoughtful young 
men. Fleming H. Revell Company, New York and 
Chicago. 

The second series was delivered by the late Rev. Robert 
L. Dabney, D. D., LL. D., and was published: Christ Our 
Penal Substitute. The Presbyterian Committee of Pub- 
lication, Richmond, Va. 

Both these are books of great merit, and may easily be 
gotten by any who desire it. 

The author of this, the third series, was selected by the 
trustees and the faculty of Davidson College, who as- 
_ signed him the subject discussed in this little volume, 
with instructions to publish the lectures after their de- 
livery. 


PREFACE. 


THE writer has long felt the need of a discussion of the 
covenants of the Spirit as found in the Scriptures, with 
special reference to the claims of Modern Mysticism. 
Those whom we designate as mystics seem greatly to 
exalt the office and functions of the Holy Spirit, and they 
claim that the traditional view is inadequate, and even 
mischievous to man and dishonoring to God. Are they 
right in their contention ? 

We do not profess to teach anything new. We con- 
sider the teaching of the Westminster Confession of Faith 
and other standards of the Reformed Churches to be 
absolutely true and sufficient, as they set forth the gracious 
operations of the Holy Spirit in redemption. 

We do hope, however, to set up and maintain the tra- 
ditional view as taught in them, by treating the subject 
from a different point of view, and in refutation of 
heresies that were not prominently before the minds of 
those who formulated these standards. 

No man may hope to add to the immortal treatise of 
John Owen on the Holy Spirit; but there has arisen a 
need of treatment from a different point of view. It is 
surprising that the recent exhaustive work of Dr. Kuyper 
does not touch this need. We have a theory which may 
account for this, but it will not be profitable. to discuss it 
in this place. 


6 Preface. 


Our aim is to ascertain and classify all the works of 
the Holy Spirit in all ages and dispensations, and to 
differentiate them one from the other by accurate defini- 
tion; and also to determine, from the Scriptures, which 
have been permanent and universal and will be till the end 
of time, and which were limited and temporary. So far 
as we know, this ground has not been traversed, nor 
indeed has its importance been appreciated. 

Having accomplished this, as we hope and believe, we 
then bring the more popular claims of Modern Mysticism 
to the test of ascertained principles, and then consider 
their special pleas based on the Scriptures. 

We are aware of the difficulty of treating so large a 
subject in so narrow a compass. It is even more difficult 
to make the discussion sufficiently scientific and exhaus- 
tive to satisfy the learned and sufficiently popular to 
benefit the general reader. 

No apology is needed for the polemic aspects of this 
volume, because the advocates of the views herein com- 
batted do maintain a constant warfare upon those who 
differ from them. 

We have thought it best to divide the discussion into 
short chapters for the convenience of the reader, rather 
than into the division by lectures. 

The thoughtful reader may perhaps find it profitable to 
read “Summary I.” at the close before reading the dis- 
cussion. J. B. SHEARER. 


Davidson, N. C. 


CONTENTS. 


TN ERGDUCTION 2) so iid Ske ee Bae Pore rte Mee eh nea 


PHRAPRINITY toa Pe ea Rae ee ae 


CHAPFER-T 


THESSUPERNATURAL, 620i be seen sea cee ee eS sens 


CHAPTER TY: 


RELATIONS OF THE SUPERNATURAL TO THE GODHEAD, 
AND TO THE SEVERAL PERSONS OF THE GODHEAD, . 


CHAPTER IV. 


THE COVENANTS OF THE SPIRIT, ......--- eee seen: 


CHAPTER. Y. 


THE CovENANTS OF THE SPIRIT AS RENEWED AND 
REFPERATED. BY CHRIST 50s oi cuhiceis pam cen wena ae 


CHAPTER VI. 


Is MopERN MYSTICISM SCRIPTURAL? 4... eee eee 


CHAPTER VII. 


PLAUSIBLE EVASIONS. -— CLASSIFICATION OF MysTIC 


PIOCTRINES haces cate eames Panta awit helena coe she leeet nts 


32 


65 


8 Contents. 


CHAPTER ie bb be PAGE. 


I. THe Witness OF THE SPIRIT.—REVELATIONS 
BY THE SPIRUD, | wg een en ee ets 82 


CHAPIER (IX. 


LE DIVINE: HEALING fost ohio mae serene le or etnies 86 
CHAP TIER x: 

Ill. REDEMPTIVE PROCESSES EXTRAORDINARY, ....-- 92 
1. ENDUEMENT WITH POWER, .........---- g2 
SPHERE HIGHER LIFE (25 5 en. ola fie ar 94 
3. THE COMPLETE SURRENDER, ....-..+-++- 96 

GHAPFER-XT. 
REDEMPTIVE Processes EXTRAORDINARY (Con- 
PINUED )5 ork Aa ils ek ra ree es ticies tutte tag a 99 
4. THE INFILLING OF THE SPIRIT, .......... 99 
5. COMPLETE SANCTIFICATION, ......+-+--- 102 


CHAPTER XII. 


SUM M ARIES. “cis cu’s ulifomes Stans che slaty aus eaph ne Geren gane 108 
SUM MARY J nena onic ciate ote ie metas tuiitiees 108 
SuMMary ILI., 


INTRODUCTION. 


DuRING the past half century there has been a large 
output of literature on the Holy Spirit, his office and 
work. The period has been especially marked by the 
popular nature of the literature which it has produced. 
The great classical works on this subject, as, for example, 
John Owens’ two volumes, have not been superseded or 
surpassed; but the very extent and profundity of such 
works, together with a somewhat heavy and prolix style, 
have put them beyond any but the most diligent students. 
No doubt, the increase of popular treatises, accessible and 
interesting to the laity, together with the increased em- 
phasis in preaching on the work of the Holy Spirit, has 
been a great blessing to the church. It has been a health- 
ful reaction from both sacerdotalism and formalism. But, 
like all reactions, it has swung too far, and the result 
has been by no means an unmixed good. There has been 
a great deal of ignorant and shallow writing on this sub- 
ject, followed by equally ignorant and shallow preaching. 
The very familiarity with which the subject is treated 
seems to lack reverence, and sometimes savors of pro- 
fanity. Many old errors have gained a foothold in the 
most orthodox churches, under the guise of a higher type 
of piety. Much confusion has resulted in the minds of 
the people. It has been difficult to combat some of these 
errors, because Scripture terms have been used in an 


10 Introduction. 


entirely new sense, and have become so closely associated 
in the popular mind with certain peculiar views, that it 
is difficult to use these terms without seeming to sanction 
such views, or to reject the views without seeming to. 
reject Scripture. Some work has been needed which 


would clear up this whole subject in the minds of the 
people. It must first of all be scriptural, taking account 


of every passage of Scripture bearing on this subject, 
and giving a fair and impartial interpretation to each and 
to all together. It must also be logical and coherent, 
showing the relation of the particular offices and work, 
the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit to general doc- 
trine. It must also be positive, not merely pointing out 
the error, but stating the truth. This, we think, has been 
done in the work which we now take pleasure in intro- 
ducing to the reader. So far as we remember, not an 
important passage of Scripture has been overlooked ; it is 
logical and clear, laying first the foundation in a concise 
summary of the doctrine of the Trinity and the person- 
ality and office of the Holy Spirit. It not merely gives us 
a criterion by which we may reject error, but gives a 
positive answer to the question, What have we ieft? We 
know of no other work which covers this ground. 

The writer may be pardoned for a personal reference 
to the author of these lectures, because one of the great 
difficulties of answering some of the peculiar errors 
treated in this book is that one lays himself open to the 
charge of lacking the higher operations of the Spirit, 
consecration, “power for service,” fruitfulness in Chris- 


Introduction. 11 


tian work, etc. The writer Has known the author of these 
lectures for nearly thirty years, has studied the Word of 
God under his teaching, has listened to his sermons, has 
lived in his house, and knows him to be a consecrated 
man of God, devout, humble and self-sacrificing, and has — 
seen the fruits of the Holy Spirit’s blessing upon his 
work. He has seen in him the evidence of “peace of 
conscience, assurance of God’s love, joy in the Holy 
Ghost,” and “power for service” in the true sense of that 
term, together with a “higher Christian life’ yet ever 
growing higher, as he approaches those heights whence 
by faith he sees the visions and hears the music of the 
heavenly city, which lies now not far before him. Out 
of not only a profound scholarship, but a ripe Christian 
experience, this book comes to our church. 


J. R. HowErtTon. 
Charlotte, N. C., April 4, 1905. 


MODERN MYSTICISM. 


CHAPTER Fe 
THE TRINITY. 


HE subject assigned for this course of lectures is, 
“The Covenants of the Spirit, Considered with 
Special Reference to Modern Mysticism.” This discus- 
sion calls for a discriminating statement of the works of 
the Holy Spirit and the functions of his office as revealed 
in the Scriptures, in order to bring the claims and teach- 
ings of Modern Mysticism to the test of the Covenants of 
the Spirit, as we shall ascertain them to be, with their 
scope and limitations. In other words, it will be necessary 
to differentiate what is limited and temporary, and what 
is permanent and universal in those covenants. 
Mysticism claims a wide range of spiritual gifts and 
operations which the ordinary believer does not enjoy: 
such as, Assurance by direct personal witness of the 
Spirit; Enduement with power; Infilling of the Spirit; 
Higher life; Second blessing; Immediate sanctification ; 
Revelation of truth in the Christian Consciousness; Faith 
cure; Anointing with oil; Laying on of hands; Attesta- 
tion of answer of prayer; a conscious revelation of the 
meaning of Scripture, especially unfulfilled prophecies, 
etc. : 2.8989 
We must needs approach this subject from the Trini- 
tarian point of view, which is the view of all really evan- 
gelical Christianity. Besides, the advocates of the views 


14 Modern Mysticism. 


which we propose to examine claim to magnify the office 
work of the Holy Spirit far more than the average ortho- 
dox Trinitarian; and a Unitarian Mysticism would be a 
solecism. 

It is, however, necessary to consider briefly the doctrine — 
of the Trinity as set forth in the Scriptures—the Old and 
the New. Some think that this doctrine is a New Testa- 
ment doctrine strictly, or, at least, that it is very obscurely 
taught in the Old Testament. They are confirmed in this 
view by the fact that the Jews of the present day are 
largely Unitarian. The Jews of Christ’s day were not 
Unitarians. They held the doctrine of the Sonship, but 
denied his claim to be the Son, because this, in their 
opinion, would make him equal with God (John v. 17, 18), 
“But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, 
and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill 
him, because he had not only broken the Sabbath, but said 
also that God was his father, making himself equal with 
God.” In the remainder of the chapter (verses 19-47) 
he unfolds his relations to the Father and his obvious 
claims to the Sonship, as set forth in the Scriptures, and 
especially by Moses. After they had thus rejected his 
claims to be their Theocratic King and Messiah, it seems 
both logical and necessary that they drift into. Unitarian- 
ism. It is therefore pertinent to inquire whether the pure 
Monotheism of the Old Testament was Unitarian or 
Trinitarian, or non-committal on this point. 

The doctrine of the Trinity is the surface doctrine of 
the Old Testament—not taught in categorical form and in 
affirmative statement, but it is assumed as the starting 
point of written Revelation. The existence of God, of the 
heavens, of the earth, of matter and spirit, of man and 
animal, are all fundamental assumptions. The Scriptures 
deal only with the nature and relations of all these things. 


The Trinity. 15 


The word El and the fuller forms Elohe and Elohim 
are the names of God in the threefold sense in which we 
use the name God in English: First, Deity or Divinity as 
opposed to humanity and other creatures; second, the 
Godhead, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; third, God the | 
Father, as distinguished from the Son and Spirit. We 
readily discover in which of these senses the word is used, 
by the context, by prescriptive usage, and by other prin- — 
ciples of a sound exegesis. | 

The name Jehovah, found about seven thousand times 
in the Old Testament, and translated Kurios in the septua- 
gint, and LORD in the English version, printed in capi- 
tals, is the specific name of the second person in the 
Trinity—The Son, The Memra, The Wisdom, The Word, 
The Redeemer, The Saviour, The Mediator of all the 
covenants or dispensations. These names and others be- 
long to him and to no other, setting forth his personality 
and his functions in varied form. 

The third person is Ruah—the Spirit, the Spirit of God, 
the Spirit of the Lord (Jehovah). He is sent by the 
Father and by the Son, as we learn from the New Testa- 
ment (John xiv. 16, xvi. 7), “I will pray the Father, and 
he shall give you another Comforter, even the Spirit of 
truth.” “Tf I go not away the Comforter will not come 
unto you; but if I depart I will send him unto you.” 
These passages teach that the Spirit proceeds from the 
Father and from the Son. The procession of the Spirit 
from the Father and from the Son is obvious from Genesis 
to Malachi. The very nomenclature indicates it: “The 
spirit of God,” and “The spirit of the Lord.” The dis- 
cussion of his relations, functions, and works will verify 
this more and more as we proceed. 

. Before going further it is necessary to show a little 
more fully that Jehovah is the specific name of the second 


16 Modern Mysticism. 


person, and to identify him with the incarnate Son of the 
New Testament. 

Some maintain that Jehovah is the incommunicable 
name of God, expressing the attribute of eternal self- 
existence. This theory is derived from the fact that the 
name is a form of the verb “to be,” either a future or a 
participial form, and is translated in one place “I Am.” 

Others say that it is the covenant name of God because 
the name is emphasized at the burning bush, in Egypt, at 
Mt. Sinai, and throughout the Theocracy. There is no 
need to combat either of these views, because they both 
apply equally to him if he be the eternal Son of God, and 
also the covenant-keeping God of all ages. 

Some again tell us it is the name of the Godhead and 
speak of him as the Tri-une Jehovah ; and still others say 
that the name is equally applicable to each person of the 
Godhead, and so make it the virtual equivalent of God in 
the sense of Deity. These two views furnish easy step- 
ping stones to Unitarianism. If we surrender the specific 
name of the Son it will be easy to surrender his distinct 
personality. Or if we give the same specific name to each 
of the three persons, it would be natural and easy to con- 
found the distinctions of the persons as Unitarians do. 

Let us approach this matter another way. The proper 
Divinity of Jehovah is universally conceded and his claim 
to it indisputable, whether we cite his names, titles, attri- 
butes, words or works. Then he stands forth as a person, 
distinct and unique, from Genesis to Malachi, as agent 
and actor in every conceivable relation to all things, and 
also without a single hint of a change of person or rela- 
tions. : 

This name is always rendered Kurios (Lord) in the 
Septuagint. This is a personal title with the definite 
atticle, as in English, the LORD. This shows, at least, 


The Trinity. 17 


that those early translators considered the name a per- 
sonal name, and this certainly would seem to be the sur- 
face and common-sense view. ‘ 

It is now largely admitted that the Jehovah of the 
Theophanies was always the second person in the Trinity, 
and that the visible manifestations of his presence, whether 
as a man at Mamre and at Jericho, or as a flame of fire in 
Horeb and at Mt. Sinai, or in a cloud over the tabernacle 
and beneath the cherubims, and the like, were but adum- 
brations and prophecies of the incarnation. It is easy to 
our faith to believe that the Son, who is the substance of 
the Father’s glory, and in whom dwells all the fulness of 
the Godhead bodily, should be the only revealer, and the 
only mediator in all dispensations as he certainly was in 
the new. 

The following pointers are still more satisfactory : 

1. In the first chapter of Genesis God is said to create 
all things, and we know that their origin is divine; but in 
the second chapter, in the fourth commandment, and 
numerously elsewhere, it is taught that Jehovah is the 
Creator. According to John the Creator is the divine 
Word, the second person, the Son, who “‘became flesh and 
dwelt among us.” 

2. One cannot read Luke’s story of Zacharias, Elisa- 
beth, Mary, Anna, Simeon, and the babes John and Jesus, 
and fail to see that the Lord Jehovah of the Old Testa- 
ment becomes the Jesus of the New Testament, or in other — 
words, that the Lord of the Old Testament is the incarnate 
Lord of the New. 

3. He was the lawgiver and the judge from the begin- 
ning for Adam, Eve, the serpent and Cain; but Christ 
says, “The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed 
all judgment to the Son.” Judgment and the execution of 
judgment are the prerogatives of the Son.” (John v. 


18 Modern Mysticism. 


22-27; Acts ii. 21-36; vii. 30-60; Heb. ii. 7-19; iv. 25 
EF Cor. x, 4-03 Revii+8.) 

4. Peter at Pentecost, Stephen the first martyr, Paul in 
Hebrews, and John in Revelation evidently identify the 
Lord and Christ. 

3. But why argue this point further? Whatever sum- 
mary we may make of Jehovah's functions and preroga- 
tives gathered from the Old Testament Scriptures, we 
may make the same summary from the New Testament 
for the Son of Man because he is the Son of God. 

This discussion of the Sonship of Jehovah in the Trinity 
is by no means exhaustive, but is sufficient to vindicate 
the statement that the Trinity is the essential doctrine of 
God in the Old Testament. This discussion may seem 
to be irrelevant to the trend of this course of lectures, but 
not so. If we wish to discuss the office and functions of 
either person in the Trinity, and to make any proper 
analysis and classification of the supernatural, we must 
start with a clear recognition of all three persons and of 
their relations to each other. If our notions of the Father 
and of the Son, or of either, are confused, or if our recog- 
nition of either is at fault, then our notions of his office 
and work will be indistinct and presumably false; and 
our notions of the Spirit and his relations to the other two 
will be equally confused, and’ certainly partial, if not 
actually false. 


CHAP TE RUDD 
THE SUPERNATURAL. 


E considered it necessary to approach our subject 

from the Trinitarian point of view. It is also 
necessary for us to approach our subject from the point 
of view of the supernatural. By supernatural we mean 
that which is above the natural, independent of it, and 
suiperior to it in time, position and causation. Now be- 
cause God is the great first cause of all things he is the 
only supernatural being, and all his works, activities and 
manifestations are properly classed as the supernatural. 
In contrast with this is the natural, which term embraces 
all created things, material and spiritual. The term in- 
cludes under it all the activities, agencies, forces and 
changes which belong to created things. The regular 
operation of these causes and forces is called nature’s law. 
It is evident, therefore, that the supernatural conditions 
the natural, both logically and chronologically. The 
natural began in time, but God is from eternity to eternity. 
Nature is limited and finite, God is infinite in all his per- 
fections. It would seem evident, therefore, even from 
natural theology, that God cannot be separated from his 
created universe. Revelation teaches us more plainly that 
the supernatural not only overlaps the natural in time, but 
maintains the most intimate relations to it. 

It is proper then to study the supernatural from the 
standpoint of Revelation. We have already cited the 
mode. of the divine essence. “Three persons in the God- 
head, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and these three are 
one God, the same in substance, equal in power and 
glory.” It remains to classify all divine works, activities 


20 Modern Mysticism. 


and manifestations, so far as revealed, and then, if pos- 
sible, define and trace the relations of the several persons 
of the Godhead to the same. 

Before proceeding further, however, it would seem 
necessary to consider and dispose of three other terms 
that have led to confusion of thought: Preternatural, 
Contra-natural, and Miraculous. All three terms have 
been confounded with Supernatural. 

The preternatural is something unusual and strange, 
and not readily accounted for—aside from what might be 
expected from known laws, but still the result of those 
laws. Preternatural things have been often considered 
supernatural. Ignorance and superstition contribute to 
this mistake. } 

The term contra-natural has rarely been used—“‘con- 
trary to nature.’ The attempt was recently made by a 
strong and discriminative theologian to popularize the 
term as the exact definition of the miracle, and some of 
his pupils have adopted the definition. But in his discus- 
sion of the term he confounds several forms of the super- 
natural, if indeed he does not make the miracle embrace 
all the supernatural, instead of being one of its subdi- 
visions. 

The term miraculous is very generally used as another — 
name for the supernatural. This mistake has made a dis- 
criminating discussion of miracles very difficult. Logi- 
cians call this mistake the fallacy of paronymous words. 
The adjective miraculous has been so frequently used to 
designate the supernatural as such that it is so defined in 
our dictionaries. This leads to a widespread confusion in 
discussing the miracle which is oniy one mode of the 
supernatural. We shall, therefore, avoid the use of all 
three of these terms, as not necessary and possibly mis- 
leading. 


The Supernatural. 21 


The Scriptures indicate five subdivisions of the super- 
natural, and but five: Creation, Providence, The Redemp- 
tive, Inspiration, and Miracle. We shall consider each of 
these separately in order to justify the classification. 

1. Creation. God in creation originated the natural, 
set up nature’s laws, and established the present order of 
things. There was absolute creation and relative creation. 
He originated matter and spirit out of nothing. This was 
absolute creation. By relative creation he “created and 
made” the present cosmos and filled the earth with teem- 
ing vegetable and animal life, using materials already in 
existence. In the case of man, he created him in the 
image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true 
holiness; that is, the spiritual part of man, by absolute 
creation; and he fashioned him a body and gave him 
animal life just as he made all below him, out of the dust 
of the ground, by relative creation. In all creation, how- 
ever, he wrought directly by his supreme power without 
the use of natural causes, for in the beginning there were 
no natural causes, or second causes, but he created them 
all. The Scriptures so represent it. “By faith we under- 
stand,” for he has told us so, “that the worlds were framed 
by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were 
not made of things which do appear.” (Heb. xi. 3.) In 
Psalms xxxiii. 6-9, you have an inspired statement of the 
creative act, “By the word of the Lord were the heavens 
made, and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 
He gathered the waters of the sea together as an heap; 
he layeth up the depth in storehouses.” ‘For he spake, 
and it was done: he commanded and it stood fast.” In 
the account of creation, in the first chapter of Genesis, the 
divine fiat went forth six times. 

_ 2. Providence. “God’s works of providence are his 
most holy, wise and powerful preserving and governing 


22 Modern Mysticism. 


all his creatures and all their actions.” The divine imma- 
nence is included in this definition—that is, his essential 
presence to “uphold, direct, and govern all creatures, 
actions, and things, from the greatest even to the least,” 
and that without a hint of pantheism. Paul says, “In him 
we live and move and have our being” (Acts xvil. 28) ; 
“By him all things consist” (Col. i. 17); “He worketh 
all things after the counsel of his own will” (Eph. i. 11). 
“By the same providence, he ordereth them all to fall out 
according to the nature of second causes, either necessa- 
rily, freely, or contingently.” In other words, he works 
sn accordance with nature’s laws and by means of them. 
Eve recognized this doctrine of Providence when she said, 
at the birth of her first-born, “I have gotten a man of the 
Lord’; and when Seth was born, she said, “God hath 
appointed me another seed instead of Abel.” 

Thus in the very beginning we find this doctrine of 
providence working in accordance with and through sec- 
ond causes. This same providence notes the falling spar- 
row, clothes the lilies, appoints the sea its bounds, holds 
ourebreath in his hands, and fixes the destinies of nations. 
In all his ordinary providence he uses means, as he works 
all things according to the purpose of his will. But he is 
still left “free to work without, above, and against them 
at his pleasure.” Creation and providence do not exhaust 
the supernatural, nor hamper him in other activities. 

3. The Redemptive. The words redeem and redemp- 
tion have two well-defined usages. One is the work of 
redemption that Christ wrought for our sin-cursed race, 
beginning with his incarnation and ending with his resur- 
rection and ascension, so that a complete salvation was 
wrought out and provided for sinners. In accomplishing 
this he used every form of the supernatural enumerated 
in this classification, as might easily be shown. There- 


The Supernatural. 23 


fore, this work of redemption then wrought by him does 
not call for or justify a separate classification. But there 
is a work of redemption which is divinely wrought and 
by which he doth certainly apply and communicate the - 
purchased redemption to sinners. This application and 
communication of a complete salvation is not a naturalistic 
process, not the working of natural affections, nor the 
mere response of the natural mind and heart to the power 
of truth, winning the soul to virtue and holiness; but the 
actual redemption of each sinner requires  super- 
natural agencies, instrumentalities, powers, and processes 
wrought. These we designate by the term “redemptive” 
as the third form of the supernatural. The redemptive 
began with the Covenant of Grace, between the Father 
and the Son in the counsels of eternity, spans the whole 
ark of time and shall only end, if ever, when the last 
glorified and redeemed sinner shall be confirmed in inde- 
fectible bliss forever. 

The redemptive includes intercession within the veil, 
effectual calling, justification, adoption, sanctification, as- 
surance of God’s love, peace of conscience, joy in the Holy 
Ghost, increase of grace, and perseverance therein to the 
end. 

This classification is made from the standpoint of the 
strictest orthodoxy which maintains that regeneration and 
remission of sins are a divine prerogative; that repentance 
unto life is a saving grace; that the means of grace, the 
word, the sacraments, and prayer, are made effectual to 
the elect for salvation by the blessing of Christ and the 
working of his Spirit. 

We believe also that the virtue, efficacy, and benefits of 
the purchased redemption were communicated, in all ages 
and: dispensations from the beginning of the world, by 
the same Spirit, in and by promises, types, and sacrifices, 


24 Modern Mysticism. 


which revealed the Lamb slain from the foundation of the 
world, the same yesterday, to-day and forever. 

This brief statement of the scope of the supernatural 
in redemptive processes is in accord with the confessions 
of all the Reformed Churches, and is in harmony with the 
thirty-nine articles of the Church of England, and also 
with the fourteen articles of John Wesley. It is therefore 
not necessary to enter upon any elaborate discussion or 
defence of them. No mystic could consistently question 
them, for mysticism claims to exalt the supernatural in 
redemption yet more. 

4. Inspiration. What is inspiration? We have in 
2 Peter i. 21 a good working definition, exactly suited to 
uphold the authority of prophecy and make its word sure, 
‘Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but 
holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy 
Ghost.” This may not be a categorical definition, but it 
suggests that the source of all inspiration is divine. This 
subject has suffered, like so many others, for lack of clean- 
cut definition. If we can find what is generic in all inspi- 
ration, we may then discuss the several specific forms of 
it, and escape the confusion of thought which so often 
prevails in discussing it. The generic idea may be stated 
thus: Inspiration is a communication from a divine person 
to a person who receives it as such. The divine person 
must be cognized and recognized as the author of the 
communication as distinctly as the communication itself. 
Carlyle speaks of the inspiration of genius, the inspiration 
of circumstances, the inspiration of a great crisis, as if 
this were all of inspiration. But this is only the result of 
natural forces, and God’s connection with it is only in a 
providential way, working in and by second causes. Such 
inspiration is purely subjective, finding expression some- 
times in works of genius, sometimes in great and heroic 


The Supernatural. 25 


deeds, but there is no recognition of God as the teacher, 
guide and leader. “Thus saith the Lord” was the in- 
spired prophet’s refrain—a person speaking to a person, 
and the person spoken to recognizes the divine speaker. . 
But is there no divine teaching in which we do not recog- 
nize the teacher? Yes, in the redemptive processes the 
blind eyes are opened, and we are taught wondrous things 
out of his law. But this is not inspiration, and there is 
no certain criterion by which to test the teaching and the 
teacher except by “comparing spiritual things with spir- 
itual” in the word. 

In Heb. i. 1, Paul says that God “at sundry times and in 
divers manners spake in time past to the fathers.’ He 
spake in divers manners—sometimes in theophanies, as to 
Abraham and to Joshua; sometimes in dreams, as in the 
cases of Joseph and Abimelek; sometimes in an audible 
voice, as on Mt. Sinai to Moses, anid from the oracle to 
Aaron; sometimes in waking visions, as in the cases of 
Daniel and Ezekiel. We are not told how they always 
identified God as the author of dreams, visions, and voices, 
but they did so with supreme confidence and unerring 
certainty. Even little Samuel said, “Speak, Lord, for thy 
servant heareth,’ and the result proved that the commu- 
nication was a sure word of prophecy. 

Sometimes these communications were for the special 
benefit of the persons receiving them, as in the case of 
Jacob at Bethel; or for some special person named, as to 
David by Nathan the prophet; or to solve some great 
emergency as when Korah, Dathan and Abiram rebelled ; 
or to present the horoscope of nations as in Daniel’s 
prophecies; or in larger measure than all the rest, to set 
forth in prophetic symbol and ritual and type, and in 
Messianic prophecy, the historic unfolding and consum- 
mation of the great scheme of redemption. 


26 Modern Mysticism. 


At this point it will not be difficult to trace the scope, 
limitations and specific forms, modes, and varieties of 
these divine communications. We read a great deal about 
verbal inspiration, plenary inspiration, revelation, me- 
chanical inspiration, superintendence, divine dictation, 
partial inspiration and so on, until we have confusion 
worse confounded. Starting with our definition that in- 
spiration is a communication from a person to a person, 
ordinary common sense would seem to settle all these 
matters. 

Inspiration furnishes a revelation of new truth when 
necessary to the divine purpose; it restates old truth with 
emphasis and authority when necessary ; it expounds 
truth as may be necessary; it inserts or omits details in 
the record of events; it omits what may be irrelevant, anid 
inserts what is relevant to the proper guidance, instruc- 
tion, and government of his people. In written inspira- 
tion, therefore, there is no need to minimize the claims of 
the Bible to be the Word of God. Usually the prophet 
fully understood the purport of his message, sometimes 
not. 

In these communications the personal equation was 
always recognized, and the style and words of his message 
were as distinctly his own as if the writer originated it all, 
so that the words of men are the words of God. This is 
the analogue of the incarnate word—very God and very 
man. 

It is germane to the purpose of this discussion to note 
here that inspiration or divine communications were both 
common anid necessary to the welfare of the race from the 
first, in all dispensations, down to the close of the canon. 
Before the flood the stories of Cain and Abel, and Enoch, 
and Noah, in that briefest of histories, indicate that divine 
communications were the rule, even if there were not also 
written oracles then, as some Suppose. 


The Supernatural. ay 


After the flood the stories of the patriarchs would mean 
nothing without the theophanies and other forms of in-_ 
spiration. In that hierarchy which antedated and over- 
lapped the earlier formation and growth of the Jewish ~ 
system, Melchizedek, and Jethro prince of Median, Poti- 
pherah priest of On, and Balaam had the oracle by virtue 
of their office as high priests of their people. In fact, 
every priest, whether high priest or family priest, had the 
oracle by virtue of his office—no oracle, no priest. The 
ancients understood it so, even among heathen nations. 
In course of time the priesthood passed from the first- 
born, or the head of the house, to the Aaronic priesthood, 
and every priest had access to the oracle through the high 
priest; and alongside of the transference of prophecy and 
oracle from the family patriarch there grew up a class of 
prophets called of God to obviate the evils of a hereditary 
priesthood, and supplement a partial canon. 

The numbers of this prophetic and inspired class were 
far larger than is generally supposed, for in the days of 
Ahab in the kingdom of Israel, semi-apostate as it was, 
there were at least five hundred, for Jezebel slew four 
hundred prophets of the Lord, and Obadiah hid one hun- 
dred by fifties in a cave, and within a few years after, 
under the tutelage of Elijah, there were several hundred 
more before his translation. It is true that some seek to 
escape these facts by saying that these prophets were 
merely religious teachers like our own, without any form 
of inspiration. We reply, however, that they knew before- 
hand that Elijah was to be taken away as well as Elisha 
did, who was called to be his successor and the head of 
the order of prophets. Besides, there is no intimation in 
the Scriptures that the word prophet was ever used in any 
such lower and accommodated sense. This assumption 
is gratuitous, and made to do duty in minimizing the 


28 Modern Mysticism. 


supernatural in the prophetic office. Here again, however, 
a man of mystical tendencies will raise no objection to all 
that is claimed for the Scripture prophet. 

5. The Miracle is the last subdivision in the classifica- 
tion of the supernatural. It differs from the others in 
several particulars. 

1. It is a work visible to the bodily senses when 
wrought. In creation there were and could be no wit- 
nesses. In providence God moves in a mysterious and 
unseen way. In redemption the kingdom set up within us 
cometh without observation; the processes are subjective 
and can only be judged by the fruits. In inspiration the 
heart and the mind are enlightened by a teacher not mani- 
fest to the senses. The theophany proper is complex; the 
part visible to the senses is a miracle, for a reason to be 
noted later on. The miracle in contrast with all other 
supernatural works was visible to the natural senses, @. g., 
the answer by fire at Mt. Carmel, and the raising of Laza- 
rus from the dead. 

2. The miracle is not the result of natural causes and 
forces, e. g., the death of all the first-born in Egypt, and 
‘the feeding of the five thousand. 

3. It is not a violation of the laws of nature, nor even a 
suspension of them, as is sometimes claimed. The laws 
of nature are uniform, and some urge this truth to show 
the impossibility of miracle. The true first principle is 
this: The same causes under the same conditions always 
produce the same effects. We believe this, and we cannot 
help it. But change the conditions, and there is a change 
in the results. Dampen the gunpowder, and the explosion 
is retarded or prevented, according to the extent of the 
change. And further, if a new and adequate cause is 
introduced there is a change in the result. And further 
still, when in any given conditions an unexpected result 


The Supernatural. 29 


is seen, we know that some new cause has been introduced 
in the experiment. This is true in the mere working of — 
natural law. , 

4. In the miracle a new and adequate cause intervenes. 
The result proves its presence, and because no natural 
cause or catises are adequate to produce the result, we 
conclude that it is supernatural. It is argued that this is 
the stronghold of superstition. So it is, if this were all. 

5. There is abundant evidence that the new and ade- 
quate cause is divine. In the laboratory the chemist pro- 
duces a certain result in an experiment; he announces to 
his class that by adding another ingredient to the crucible 
he will obtain another result, and then verifies the power 
of the new cause by the result, and no one questions the 
accuracy of his science. 

So in the miracle. The miracle-worker in numerous 
cases announced the miracle before it came, and so verified 
the cause and origin to be divine, e. g., Moses announced 
most of the plagues in advance, and Elisha announced the 
healing of Naaman’s leprosy. 

6. But why such intervention of supernatural agent and 
cause? Was it merely for governmental purposes? Was 
it merely an expression of goodness when Christ healed 
the sick and cast out devils? Was it merely for didactic 
purposes, to reveal his character and illustrate the opera- 
tions of grace? Hardly. These things were doubtless 
incidental results, or rather corollaries, deducible from the 
miracles. It is futile and even worse to assign any reason 
for the miracle eer as God interprets it in the ae 
tures. 

7. The miracle was wrought for confirmation ag the 
messenger and the message—the prophets’ testimonials ; 
God on the witness-stand attesting the claims of his mes- 
senger, and emphasizing the message, and sometimes at- 


30 Modern Mysticism. 


testing his own claims. This was a rational purpose and 
worthy of Deity. The prophet was the accredited minister 
plenipotentiary and extraordinary from the court of 
heaven to men. His credentials must be divine, or his 
authority would be questioned, or the signature counter-_ 
feited. Base imitations and counterfeits have been put 
forward by impostors in all ages; but who has proved the 
miracle-worker of the Bible an impostor ? 

8. Does the Bible so represent the miracle as evidential 
and teach that this is its primary and chief purpose? The 
burning bush was evidence to Moses that the speaker was 
what he claimed to be—Jehovah. The leprous hand and 
the serpent rod were signs to him of his commission, and 
also signs to his people in Egypt. The signs and wonders 
in the land of Ham were incontestible testimony to the 
claims of Jehovah and of Moses his servant. In the 
rebellion of Korah, Dathan and Abiram, the claims of 
Moses and Aaron were settled by the fire consuming two 
hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, by the yawning 
chasm that swallowed up the three leaders, by the plague 
stayed by Aaron’s burning censor as he stood between the 
living and the dead, and by the budding of Aaron’s rod 
while laid up over night beside the ark of the testimony. 
Even the stupendous miracles of help and deliverance— 
stich as the crossing of the Red Sea, the forty years of 
manna, the fall of Jericho, the numerous theocratic deliv- 
erances in battle—were, in their last analysis, in confirma- 
tion of warrants and covenants expressed and implied. 
Moses, in Deuteronomy, when citing such things, makes 
this the main lesson. 

This was Christ’s view, “If ye believe not my word, 
believe me for the works’ sake, for they do testify of me.” 
This was the popular and accepted doctrine of miracles 
with Jews and Christians, friends and enemies ; these were 


The Supernatural. ai 


the signs following, promised to attest the teaching of the 
early church. | 

g. It follows, therefore, that one who claimed to have 
received a divine communication must be prepared to 
make good his claim by the co-operation of divine power— 
the miracle, sign manual of heaven. 

The next step in our discussion is to ascertain from the 
Scriptures the relations of the several persons in the God- 
head to these several divisions of the supernatural. 

This will be attempted in the next chapter. 


CHAPTER III. 


RELATIONS OF THE SUPERNATURAL TO THE GODHEAD AND 
TO THE SEVERAL PERSONS OF THE GODHEAD. 


& Powe Scriptures represent the Father as begetting the 

Son from eternity, and the Son as the only begotten 
of the Father, and the Spirit as proceeding from the 
Father and the Son —all three, the “same in substance 
and equal in power and glory.” The blessedness of the 
Godhead was complete in love and fellowship from all 
eternity, and this blessedness could in nowise be increased 
by the love and fellowship of his creatures after creation, 
nor was that mutual blessedness marred by the sins of 
fallen angels nor fallen man. This mutuality of love and 
fellowship among the persons of the Godhead implies also 
4 mutual activity, and is a great mystery, and must not 
be construed to imply three Gods, coordinate and equal. 

In creation and afterward we may expect to trace the 
eternal distinctions of the divine persons, as fat as. te- 
vealed, in all supernatural works and activities. There 
is a proper sense in which every supernatural work is 
performed by the Godhead in all three persons, and there 
is also a distribution of these activities to each person 
according to their eternal distinctions. 

Tt would seem to be the work of the Father to originate, 
of the Son to give form to that origination, and of the 
Spirit to perfect and Gnish. Dr. Kuyper states this dis- 
tinction in these words: “In every work effected by 
Father, Son and Holy Ghost in common, the power to 
bring forth proceeds from the Father; the power to ar- 
range from the Son; the power to perfect from the 


The Supernatural and the Godhead. 23 


Spirit.” This much seems to be revealed; but we may 
not press this distinction farther than this, lest we seem 
to profane the sacred mysteries of the Godhead by seek-_ 
ing to penetrate the veil, or to darken counsel by specula- 
tion concerning that which a finite creature cannot know 
of the activities of the infinite. We shall, therefore, seek 
in all humility to limit our postulates to that which is 
clearly revealed in the Word. 

We may take up in order the five divisions of the super- 
natural. 

1. Creation. We have seen that creation, both absolute 
and relative, is a divine work, antedating second causes 
and setting up the established course of nature, both ma- 
terial and spiritual. We properly ascribe creation to the 
three persons in common when we say that God created 
the heavens and the earth, and when he said, “Let us 
make man in our image and likeness.” Still, we may 
trace a distribution in the mutuality of operation. The 
Father begets in the sense of originating matter and spirit. 
In this sense he is the Father of all things. Paul quotes 
and approves the sentiment of the heathen poet, “For we 
are also his offspring.’ The fuller revelation of the 
Father is by the Son and Spirit in their distributed ac- 
tivities. 

The Son is called the creator in the sense that he is the 
active agent in giving form and arrangement to the com- 
plete work of the Father. This distribution comports 
with the relation of sonship, for the Son is the natural 
and proper agent of the Father, and represents him in 
executing his behests. This special and intimate agency 
of the Son in creation is constantly asserted throughout 
the Old and New Testaments. This fact has already 
been emphasized sufficiently for the purposes of this dis- 
cussion. 


34 | Modern Mysticism. 


The Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son 
evidently held a prominent place in the work of creation. 
The very first statement in the Mosaic account of the 
ordering of the present cosmos is this: “The Spirit of 
God moved upon the face of the waters.” The figure is 
that of the mother bird brooding over her nest, or pet- 
haps sheltering and nurturing her brood — or, rather, 
both of these ideas combined. 

The other figure of the work of the Spirit in creation, 
as well as elsewhere, is “breath.” His name in all the 
languages means breath. Job says (xxvi. 13), “By his 
Spirit he hath garnished the heavens.” The Psalmist 
says (civ. 30), “Thou sendeth forth thy Spirit, they are 
created.” The Son and Spirit are both connected with 
creation in Psalm xxxiii. 6, “By the word of the Lord 
were the heavens made, and all the ‘host of them by the 
breath of his mouth.” 

While the Father evidently begets or originates life, 
and gives the same prerogative to the Son (John v. 26), 
the Spirit evidently improves and perfects that life, under 
the figure of the mother bird. Job says (xxxiii. 4), “The 
Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Al- 
mighty hath given me life.” 

It is usual to say that the Father is the Creator by the 
agency of the Son and by the instrumentality of the Spirit. 
Or perhaps this is better: the Spirit nurtures and per- 
fects the completed creative work of the Father and the 
Son. We certainly cannot further penetrate this great 
mystery of creation any more than we can penetrate the 
mysteries of the divine Essence. The doctrine of insepa- 
rable but distributed activities is as great a mystery as 
the doctrine of “Three in One.” 

2. Providence. We have already considered providence 
as a supernatural agency governing and directing and 


The Supernatural and the Godhead. 35 


controlling all things according to the counsel of his own 
will, working by and through second causes. This provi- 
dence, like creation, belongs to the Godhead in common, 
but at the same time there is a similar distribution of func- 
tion among the several persons of the Godhead; and we 
may trace this distribution as set forth in the Scriptures. 

In the eternal counsels of the Godhead the Father origi- 
nates the plan and scheme of his government, which is 
but another name for his eternal decrees; the Son, as 
the representative and the sole manifestation of the 
Father, is made head over all things to control and gov- 
ern; and the Spirit elaborates and collaborates the details 
of that government unto perfection. 

In a proper sense, our daily bread, the shining sun, the 
rain from heaven, and every good gift, come from the 
Father, and it is constantly so affirmed. The Son medi- 
ates and secures all these things to the righteous and the 
wicked alike, because he is head over all things, and all 
judgment has been committed to him. He setteth up one 
and putteth down another, and by him the “heavens do 
rule.” “He giveth to the beast his food, and to the young 
ravens which cry.” “He giveth snow like wool, he scat- 
tereth the hoarfrost like ashes.” ‘He causeth the wind 
to blow and the waters flow.” “He relieveth the father- 
less and the widow: but the way of the wicked he turneth 
upside down.”’ These passages, and hundreds more, refer 
to the ordinary administration of his providence. 

The functions of the Holy Spirit in this providential 
government are not definitely revealed, so far as mere 
physical causes and forces are concerned, perhaps for the 
reason that only those things are revealed which we need 
to know; but the analogy of creation, and also the start- 
ling analogy of Satan’s usurped but limited dominion, as 
the “prince of the power of the air,” would justify us 


36 Modern Mysticism. 


in holding to the providential efficiency of the Spirit 
throughout the administration of the physical universe. 

However, in the world of spirits, and especially among 
men, the Spirit's providential efficiency cannot be ques- 
tioned. There is no reference here to the redemptive 
processes wrought by him. The hearts, minds, and souls 
of men are his special arena in his function of perfecting 
the divine government instituted by the Father and ad- 
ministered by the Son. The Old Testament furnishes us 
with the key to all history by revealing God in history, 
and showing us something of the methods of his govern- 
ment of nations and individuals. In that history the 
Spirit is always prominent both in raising up and qualify- 
ing men and women for their places and relations. Abram 
and Sarah, Esau and Jacob, Joseph and Pharaoh, Moses 
and Joshua, Saul and David, Cyrus and Daniel, were no 
mere naturalistic products. Bezaleel and Aholiab, and 
wise-hearted, skillful men and women, were enabled by 
the Spirit to build the Tabernacle. Special gifts and 
talents were always conferred and wrought in persons and 
peoples, even when we eliminate all that might be classed 
as the gifts of inspiration and miracle. Cyrus was 
“anointed” for his special work, and qualified for that 
career of conquest which enabled him to restore the people 
Israel. And so we conclude that the same Spirit confers 
those special gifts that enable men to fill all the vocations 
of life. We sometimes talk of the environment producing 
the man, or the man seizing on the environment to do 
heroic things, and solve the crises of history, and we for- 
get that the environment, and the men, and the crises, are 
all wrought by the same Spirit in his office work of per- 
fecting the divine purpose. In Paul’s catalogue of gifts, 
some were extraordinary and some were ordinary, as we 
shall see later on, but he says that they were all wrought by 


The Supernatural and the Godhead. 37 


the self-same Spirit. We may therefore say, in the 
widest sense, “Who maketh thee to differ from another?” - 
and “What hast thou that thou didst not receive?” 

Some may claim, perhaps, that the distribution indi- 
cated in this analysis of creation and providence is partly 
speculative and partly inferred from clearer revelations 
concerning the official relations of the three persons to 
the three other divisions of the supernatural, redemption, 
inspiration and miracle. Our interest in these three is 
certainly vital. This doubtless accounts for the fact that 
clearer revelations concerning these have been given us. 
And we need not stop to argue that it is legitimate to 
follow well-ascertained analogies into those regions of the 
supernatural where the revelation is not so full. 

3. We come now to consider the Redemptive, as dis- 
tinguished from creation, providence, inspiration and 
miracle. All forms of the supernatural have been used, 
and some are still used, in working out the scheme of 
redemption; but there are, and there always have been, 
and there always will be, certain supernatural features 
that may properly be differentiated from all the rest under 
the name of the Redemptive. 

In a proper sense, the entire Scriptures are only the 
history of redemption; and all that is supernatural and 
all that is natural in the record is most intimately related 
to the salvation of sinful men. Still, it is profitable to 
analyze the same, and discover the relations of all the 
parts and parties. 

The Covenant of Grace between the persons of the 
Godhead, and especially between the Father and the Son, 
is from eternity. This scheme of redemption, like crea- 
tion, was born of the Father, was committed to the Son 
to elaborate and execute, and the Spirit was commissioned 
to apply and perfect the same in the souls of men. 


38 Modern M ysticism. 


The Father “gave his only begotten Son.” The Son 
wrought the works which the Father gave him to do. He 
was the angel, or messenger, or servant, executing the 
Father’s will. The whole of his mediatorial work as 
Prophet, Priest and King, as set forth in both Testaments, 
both before and since the incarnation, and all.that he shall 
do in the kingdom of glory, is the elaboration and execu- 
tion of what the Father originated. The Spirit proceeds 
from the Father and the Son to apply this redemption 
and to set up the kingdom of grace in the hearts of men, 
and to make us meet for the inheritance of the saints in 
the kingdom of glory. 

We are told that orthodoxy does not sufficiently recog- 
nize and honor the office work of the Holy Spirit in the 
salvation of sinners. Let us see: orthodoxy teaches that 
“we are made partakers of the redemption purchased by 
Jesus Christ by the effectual application of it to us by 
his Holy Spirit.” Orthodoxy teaches that “the Spirit 
applieth to us the redemption purchased by Christ, by 
working faith in us, and thereby uniting us to Christ in 
our effectual calling.” Orthodoxy teaches that “effectual 
calling is the work of God’s Spirit, whereby, convincing 
us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in the 
knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, he doth 
persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely 
offered to us in the gospel.” Orthodoxy teaches that 
regeneration, faith in Jesus Christ, and repentance unto 
life, are wrought in us by him. Orthodoxy teaches that 
by the “Word and Spirit dwelling in us, we are renewed 
in the whole man after the image of God, and are enabled 
more and more to die unto sin and live unto righteous- 
ness.” Orthodoxy teaches that the same Spirit gives us 
“assurance of God’s love, peace of conscience, joy in the 
Holy Ghost, increase of grace, and perseverance therein 


The Supernatural and the Godhead. 39 


to the end.” Orthodoxy teaches that “the fruit of the 
Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentleness, good- 
ness, faith, meekness, temperance.” The enemies of 
orthodoxy maintain that in claiming so much for the 
Spirit we do stultify the human free agent and destroy 
responsibility. We are not now concerned to vindicate 
orthodoxy from this charge. Our contention is rather 
with the modern mystic, who claims all this for the Spirit’s 
work, and much more, as the possible heritage of the be- 
liever under the covenants of the Spirit. The object of 
these discussions is to ascertain if their claims are well 
founded, which claims will be considered later on. 

4. Inspiration. We have seen that this includes, in its 
broadest sense, all divine communications of a person to 
a person, recognized as such by proper attestations. Here 
again the three persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, 
work in common with distributed functions. The Father 
originates and plans the revelation of his eternal power 
and Godhead; the Son, as mediator and revealer, admin- 
isters the same under all dispensations; and the Holy 
Spirit perfects the whole scheme, moving on the hearts 
and minds of men. The soul is his special arena of action, 
both in the redemptive processes and in inspiration, which 
we do not confound in this discussion. This inspiration 
was sometimes for the special personal direction and 
benefit of the receiver, and sometimes for the benefit of 
others, but was always properly attested, as we have 
already seen. The receiver was in either case a prophet 
just to the extent of his utterance of the communication, 
for the prophet was a spokesman for God. 

The communications to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob 
were in part personal. So, also, to Gideon, to Zachariah, 
and to Joseph. Those to Moses on Sinai, to Isaiah and 
Daniel, were mainly for others. But in every case, 


40 Modern Mysticism. 


whether the communication was personal, or to guide the 
teaching prophet in his messages to ruler or people, or 
to insure the plenary inspiration of the written Word — in 
every case the Holy Spirit was the efficient agent, and 
the Scriptures claim it all as his work, and so far as the 
prophet foretold future events he was informed and 
directed by the same Spirit. 

We do not need in this discussion to argue further the 
truth of these statements, but rather to assume them as 
undisputed, for the modern mystic gives them emphasis, 
especially in claiming to realize these same operations in 
his own personal religious experience, and as an essential 
part thereof. 

s. Miracles. We have already seen that these were 
wrought by divine power, and that they stand in a class 
to themselves, and are to be distinguished from the other 
forms of the supernatural, and must not be confounded 
with creation, nor providence, nor the redemptive, nor 
inspiration, being only ancillary to one or more of these. 
They were signs wrought for confirmation — the supreme 
test of inspiration — the prophet’s testimonials — God on 
the witness-stand attesting the messenger and the mes- 
sage. 

Tt remains now to ascertain the relations of the miracle 
to the several persons of the Godhead. Here we may 
trace the same distinctions already noted. The magicians 
in Egypt and Christ both ascribe miracles to the “finger 
of God.” They are the works of the three in one, who, 
in their unity of counsel, purpose and will, do work all 
this in common and inseparable. But here, again, we may 
trace the same distribution of activity and function as in 
other cases. 

The Father originated the works and gave them to the 
-Son to do as his natural and proper agent and representa- 


The Supernatural and the Godhead. 4I 


tive; and the Spirit put forth the same efficiency that has 
been noted in other forms of the supernatural. 7 

Othniel and Gideon and Jephthah and Samson wrought 
by the Spirit of the Lord. Christ cast out devils by the | 
Spirit of God. Paul claims that Christ wrought signs 
and wonders through him by the Holy Ghost. When the 
Jews cavilled at the supreme miracles of Christ, he said 
they sinned against the Holy Ghost. It is evident, there- 
fore, that the Son of man and Paul and Samson, and 
every other miracle-worker, performed those mighty 
works by the proper efficiency and power of the Holy 
Spirit. So obvious was this that the very name of the 
third person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, the Holy 
Ghost, came to be the synonym for extraordinary miracu- 
lous gifts, according to that common figure of speech that 
puts the cause for the effect. Such use of his name for 
such gifts may easily be differentiated from a similar use 
of his name to designate spiritual gifts and graces. 

At the risk of being tedious we have sought to distin- 
guish the different divisions of the supernatural as set 
forth in the Scripture and to define their relation to the 
several persons of the Trinity, and especially to trace in 
them all the special agency of the Holy Spirit. 

The work of creation ended when God rested from all 
his work he created and made. Therefore, we may omit 
in this discussion all further reference to creation. Provi- 
dence will abide as the fundamental mode and basic prin- 
ciple of the divine government as long as that govern- 
ment shall abide. We may now omit any further discus- 
sion of that division of the supernatural. 

There remain these three, the Redemptive Processes, 
Inspiration and Miracle, for our further consideration. 
The real question that confronts us is this, Are these three 
coeval and coextensive with the administration of grace? 


42 Modern Mysticism. 


or are some of them limited and temporary? and if so, 
which? Or, to state the question differently, The cove- 
nants of the Spirit — their scope and limitations — how 
shall they be differentiated? 

We shall take this up in the next. 


CHAPTER IV. 


THE COVENANTS OF THE SPIRIT. 


Ae word Covenant has a variety of usage in the 
Scriptures; and theologians have used the term 
with a variety of applications, all of which are legitimate, 
because they do not go beyond or outside of the senses 
in which it is used in Scripture. But in all its various 
usage, both in the Scriptures and among theologians, 
there is found a germinal idea or principle that justifies 
such variety of usage. And for purposes of clearer analy- 
sis amd needed classification it may be conveniently and 
conventionally used still more widely in discussing the 
divine administration. In fact, it is a recognized prin- 
ciple in language that any term may have an increasing 
and widening usage, limited only by essential identities 
readily seen in the new application. 

Now, the phrase “Covenants of the Spirit” may at first 
glance seem to be a novelty in theological discussions. 
It can easily be shown that the classification is not only 
allowable, by being in exact accord with both scriptural 
and theological usage, but even necessary for the right 
handling of matters pertaining to the economy of grace, 
and for guarding against serious confusion and even mis- 
chievous errors. 

It can easily be shown that all covenants have their 
limitations, and the object of this discussion is to define 
the covenants of the Spirit and ascertain their scope and 
limitations. 

It is common to say that a covenant implies two parties, 
also an agreement of some sort, also an obligation on each 


44 Modern Mysticism. 


side that cannot be broken, and the further idea of per- 
manence within obvious limits. 

Sometimes it is a formal agreement between two pat- 
ties, as between Jacob and Laban, Abraham and Abime- 
lech, or the Theocratic Covenant, made and ratified at 
Sinai and so often renewed afterward, by which Jehovah 
was made the civil head of the Jewish commonwealth. 
Sometimes it is a divine ordination, and man is the bene- 
ficiary. Such was the covenant with Noah the day he 
came out of the ark, and the obligations on God’s part 
spring out of the promises ratified by the bow in the cloud. 
as his seal and sign-manual; and the obligations on man’s 
part, as the beneficiary, spring out of blessings received 
and appropriated, or, at least, they are enhanced thereby 

Sometimes the covenant was imposed by competent 
authority. Such was the law proclaimed on Sinai and 
written on the tables of stone. 

Sometimes it was an ordinance like the salt required 
to be used in every meat offering; or the rite of circum- 
cision; or the communion cup. Other features of a cove- 
nant may or may not be traced in such ordinances. Some- 
times the uniformity of nature’s laws is spoken of as a 
covenant. In Jer. xxxiii. 20-26, God cites his covenant 
with day and night, and his appointment of the ordinances 
of heaven and earth, to show the immutability of his 
covenant with the seed of Jacob and David his servant. 
The leading idea here is permanence, and bere again man 
is the beneficiary of the pledge. Nature’s promise is God’s 
promise. | 

Then, again, the Scriptures speak of two great cove- 
nants, the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. The Old 
Covenant embraces the Old Testament dispensation, with 
all its ordinances. The New Covenant embraces the New 
Testament dispensation ushered in by Christ; and we 


The Covenants of the Spirit. 45 


divide the Scriptures by this distinction—the Old Cove- 
nant and the New —the Old Testament and the New. 
We cannot suppose that the one supersedes the other. 

except within certain limits, according to a law of ‘coves: 
nants to be traced presently. 

Every covenant has a warrant, ay pmeesed or implied. 
Sometimes it is expressed with great minuteness of detail, 
and ratified by the most solemn sanctions. Sometimes it 
is a natural ordinance; sometimes a familiar and neces- 
sary mode of administration in the realm of spiritual law 
or grace, accepted and acted upon without the necessity 
of formal promises constantly repeated. 

The Covenant of Redemption, commonly called che 
Covenant of Grace, was “entered into by the sacred Three, 
in behalf of elect sinners, on whom grace and glory were 
settled forever, in Christ their covenant Head.’ The 
administration of it was committed to the Son and 
Spirit. Mankind became parties to this covenant only 
as beneficiaries, and as parties to such special covenants 
with the Son and with the Spirit, as became necessary 
from time to time for advancing and perfecting the ad- 
ministration of that everlasting Covenant of Redemption. 

The Covenant of Works made in the garden with our 
first parents was broken, and not only they, but the race, 
were henceforth dead in sin, actual and original. Forth- 
with every son and daughter of Adam, descended from 
him by ordinary generation, is born in a state of sin and 
misery, helpless and hopeless. They all need the same 
Redeemer, the same cleansing blood, the same regenera- 
tion, the same sanctification, the same eternal life. The 
disease is the same in all generations; the remedy must 
be the same for all. The eternal Son of God is the only 
redeemer. The Holy Ghost is the only sanctifier. The 
Scriptures give us the historic unfolding of the plan of 


46 Modern Mysticism. 


redemption from Abel to John, from Genesis to Revela- 
tion. Along with the curse at Eden is the covenant 
promise of a Redeemer — the seed of the woman shall 
bruise the serpent’s head. By covenant the sacrificial 
blood pointed Abel’s faith to the blood of Christ, yet to 
be shed. The new birth, faith, repentance, and all the 
graces of the Spirit have been wrought in all ages by the 
self-same Spirit. 

The history of redemption in its unfolding needs not 
to be repeated here, except to note the agency of the 
Spirit in his threefold administration — Redemptive Pro- 

cesses, Inspiration, Miracle. 
These were three several gifts to persons in Old Testa- 
ment times, and must not be confounded with each other. 
They were not all the common heritage of all; and they 
were in no sense all necessary to the religious experience 
of every believer. 

There was evidently a sufficient warrant or covenant 
for each of these three, so that faith might rest secure. 
Faith rests in a warrant, a covenant, or a promise; and 
the faith which has no proper covenant to rest upon is 
presumption. 

We call the redemptive processes the ordinary opera- 
tions of grace wrought by the Spirit, because they are 
all necessary to save the sinner, and are the common 
experience of every believer. They are not all equally 
manifested in all, nor indeed equally in the same person 
Vat all times... 

Inspiration and Miracle are properly called extraordi- 
nary operations of the Spirit, because they were wrought 
only on occasion, and for good and sufficient reasons, and 
the extent of the operations was limited and temporary 
in euch case, and might be discontinued at any time. 
There might be no prophet, or oracle, or miracle, at a 


The Covenants of the Spirit. 47 


given place or time in the household of faith, but there 
could be no household of faith without the ordinary ORS 
tions of grace. 

More than this, prophecy and miracle, though related : 
to each other, had no necessary relations to a state of 
grace nor to saving faith. In proof, we need only cite 
the far-reaching prophecies of Balaam, himself as corrupt 
as sin; and the miracle-working power of Judas, himself 
a devil. Prophecy may cease as conditions change, but 
the ordinary operations of grace may not cease as part of 
the plan of redemption. 

Prophecy and miracle were not the privilege and the 
duty of all believers, but were in most cases official func- 
tions. The priest had the oracle by virtue of his office. 
Nor was an exalted holiness a necessary trait of the 
prophet; one was not the necessary condition of the 
other; he might have no holiness at all. Nor was the 
test of a strong personal faith found in being able to heal 
the sick and raise the dead. Prophecy and miracle were 
God-given and divinely directed for a special and definite 
purpose; and whenever conferred outside upon private 
persons, the gift was obviously limited by the divine 
purpose. 

Again, the official duties and functions of prophecy and 
miracle were not offered to all as a matter of prayer and 
faith, and were never the common heritage of the right- 
eous, to be attained by the use of the means of grace 
aright; they were of divine appointment and distribution, 
with no discredit to those not so appointed. 

Again, ordinary teachers laid no claim to inspiration, 
or, 1f they did, they were convicted of imposture and 
false prophecy, and punished with death when they failed 
to furnish the test of miracle in some form, is of 
power or knowledge. 


48 Modern Mysticism. 


We do not assert that there was no exercise of faith 
in the exercise of the gifts of prophecy and miracle when- 
ever conferred. Theologians speak of theocratic faith by 
which the judge or king secured the divine arm to fight 
their battles; and they also speak of faith of miracles, by 
which a Joshua commanded the sun and the moon to stand 
still in the heavens. Theocratic faith and the faith of 
miracles had their special warrants or covenants, with no 
reference to saving faith and its warrants. 

Again, the miracles wrought by the Spirit, as recorded 
in the Scriptures, were not limited to narrow classes or 
types which were not easily investigated, or which might 
be easily simulated, or which might even be concocted 
by a vivid and enthusiastic imagination; but they were 
unlimited in their scope and variety, and open to the in- 
spection of all, uncontroverted and incontrovertible. 

The principles set forth in these distinctions certainly 
apply to the spiritual covenants in force in the Old Testa- 
ment economy, and are of the nature of essentials, and 
not mere accidents, in these operations of the Spirit. And 
it would seem necessary that they should apply to identi- 
cally the same operations in the New Testament economy. 
Of this we shall see more anon. 

The divine administration is made up of a multitude 
of details which may be considered separately, or as large 
complex unities. In either case we find a covenant ex- 
pressed or implied. We have seen that in the physical uni- 
verse every ordinance of the heavens and the earth, and 
every natural law, is the expression of an unchangeable 
covenant. We analyze and generalize these at will to suit 
the purposes and convenience of discussion, and we may 
discover their scope and limitations. 

It is so likewise in the methods and administration of 
the divine government, and more obviously so, because 


The Covenants of the Spirit. 49 


the relations of both the parties to the covenants is more 
distinctly seen. Still more plainly do we discover the 
covenants of spiritual administration in the redemption 
of the race, where the magnitude and importance of the | 
issues call for still clearer warrants, and where faith lays 
hold on sure words of covenant and promise. 

One feature of the covenants given in the Scriptures i is 
this: old covenants were often repeated, emphasized and 
ratified with more or less fulness of detail, and often with 
such modifications, or additions, or conditions and limita- 
tions, as changing conditions did demand. And all limi- 
tations or conditions are to be found expressly stated in 
the face of the covenant, or found in the context by just 
and fair inference. 

And further, new covenants often repeat more or less 
fully the provisions of previous covenants, though such 
provisions may have been general and perpetual in their 
duration; then there is added that which is specific to 
the New Covenant, whether it be perpetual or limited in 
its application and duration. For example: the creation 
covenant authorized man to be fruitful and multiply, and 
fill the earth and subdue it, with dominion over the crea- 
tures, and assigned him as his proper food the fruits of 
the ground (Gen. i. 28, 29). A new covenant was made 
for the race the day that Noah came out of the ark, in 
which were repeated the provisions of the creation cove- 
nant, and certain other provisions were added, and the 
whole is put forward as the “bill of rights for the race.” 

Then, later on, the Sinaitic Covenant, on the secular 
side, largely repeats the covenant with Noah, with certain 
temporary modifications with respect to diet, and added 
many other things, some permanent and some temporary. 
When this Sinaitic Covenant passed away, or was termi- 
nated, it became important to ascertain what features are 


50 Modern Mysticism. 


permanent, what features are to be imitated, what prin- 
ciples may be reproduced in other concrete forms, and 
what provisions have been entirely superseded or abro- 
gated. It is not our purpose to differentiate these things, 
and it is sufficient to say that the solution of all these 
points is to be found in the Scriptures, or, in the nature 
of things, as set forth in the Scriptures. The same is 
true of all questions that spring out of the civil, social, 
religious, ecclesiastical and spiritual sides of that cove- 
nant. By analogy, therefore, it is competent to suppose 
that the various covenants of the Spirit shall be found to 
contain some provisions which are general and belong to 
all dispensations, and also some provisions which are spe- 
cial and limited. In such a case that which is specific and 
limited passes away when it has fulfilled its purpose. 

The covenants and franchises of the Old Testament 
Church are, in the main, quite well settled, and while the 
temporary has passed away by positive provision or by 
the logic of events, that which is permanent remains and 
is still the heritage of the church, of which last the Abra- 
hamic Covenant and the tables of the covenant given at 
Mount Sinai are evident examples. It has already been 
noted that the divine government, by providential control, 
and the gracious operations of the divine Spirit in the 
hearts of God’s people, such as repentance, faith, regen- 
eration, effectual calling, increase in holiness, and final 
perfection therein, have been, without question, common 
to all dispensations, and are still the heritage of all be- 
lievers. 

It remains to inquire whether inspiration, prophecy, 
special revelation of any form or measure, and miracles 
of any class or group are covenanted to the church of 
Christ; and if so, on what terms, and how long. | 

Creation was ended when God rested the seventh day, 


The Covenants of the Spirit. 51 


and the doctrine is accepted by faith. Providence is also 
a doctrine revealed in the Word and held by faith, and 
it must continue as long as there is a divine government. 
Gracious operations, also revealed to faith, will continue - 
as long as there is a sinner to be saved. Inspiration, and 
Miracle, her witness, needed to continue to the close of 
tthe canon. Did they continue longer? 

The traditional theory is that Inspiration and Miracle 
ceased with the apostles and their contemporaries; and 
that the ordinary gracious operations of the Spirit com- 
mon to all spiritual life and growth from Abel to Paul, 
and only these, do continue in the church to-day, and will 
continue throughout this dispensation. This is the teach- 
ing, by implication at least, of the Westminster Standards, 
and, indeed, of all the great confessions of the churches 
of the Reformation. Is this teaching true? 

Or, do we live under a dispensation of the Spirit upon 
which we have put unbelieving and sinful limitations, thus 
cheating ourselves of the higher possibilities of our Chris- 
tian life, and so making the triumphs of the gospel more 
difficult, if not impossible, so long as we fail to apprehend 
the warrants and covenants of the Spirit? 

Or, is there now a warrant for any or all of these mod- 
ern doctrines: Infallibility, papal or personal; Assurance 
by direct personal witness; Enduement with power; In- 
filling of the Spirit; Higher Life; Second Blessing; Im- 
mediate Sanctification; Revelation of Truth in the Chris- 
tian Consciousness; Faith Cure; Anointing with oil; 
Laying on of hands; Direct revelation of facts; Attesta- 
tion of answer to prayer; A conscious and certain Reve- 
lation of the meaning of Scripture, and especially of un- 
filled prophecies, and other similar things? 

These things are quoted in the sense of their advocates, 
who hold that the traditional view is inadequate on these 


52 Modern Mysticism. 


points, and that those who fail of these things have just 
so far a dwarfed Christian life, and a low and groveling 
faith. They sometimes affect to look down from their 
seat in “heavenly places’ with great sympathy and com- 
passion upon those who still grope blindly in the low- 
erounds of the traditional view. It is from these the 
critics come who say that the orthodox confessions need a 
clearer and fuller definition of the Spirit’s work. 

These things all belong to a school of thought which 
diverges from the traditional view of the doctrine of the 
Spirit, and of the nature, extent and limitations of his 
work in the present economy of grace. And the advocates 
proclaim, and indeed vociferate this divergence most 
loudly. 

If we are wrong, we are found limiting the grace of 
God; but if they are wrong, they are found exalting the 
presumptuous conceits of man above the sufficient 
methods of grace. 

I take it that the issue is now squarely made. Our 
only appeal shall be to the “law and to the testimony.” 


CHAP TERY. 


Tur CovENANTS OF THE SPIRIT AS RENEWED AND RE- 
ITERATED BY CHRIST. 


E would expect inspiration and miracle to continue, 
as far as needed, until the historic unfolding of the 
plan of salvation, and its divine authentication were com- 
plete, even without any special renewal of the covenants 
for their continuance. The reasons for this are obvious. 
The claims of Christ needed divine attestation, and he 
was the climax of all the past; his teaching more vital 
than that of any prophet before him; his apostles needed 
inspired guidance for shaping and directing the new cove- 
nant that was superseding the old. Did Moses and the 
Sinaitic covenant need attestation? They more. 

The New Testament canon needed to be written and 
finished as the magna charta of the kingdom of heaven as 
set up by Christ and his apostles. Did the Old Testament 
prophets need inspiration and divine attestation by mira- 
cle, still more were these needed by the writers of the 
New Testament. All agree, however, that inspiration 
and miracle abounded by warrant and covenant in the 
days of Christ and his apostles. 

Inspiration and miracle, as we have already seen, were 
no necessary part of true and vital religion in the Old 
Testament system, but were special gifts for special pur- 
poses ; nor did the enjoyment of them constitute an 
esoteric circle of higher life and superior holiness. Is 
there, then, to-day an esoteric circle of those who enjoy 
these things and an exoteric circle of those who do not, 
thus dividing those who have eternal life into two distinct 


54 Modern Mysticism. 


classes? Those who claim this (in fact, if not in word) 
assure us that the New Testament furnishes the warrants 
and covenants for this classification of believers. 

Christianity is sometimes called the dispensation of the 
Spirit. There is no objection to this designation if only 
we understand in what sense this is true, and what are the 
limitations, if any. 

There are in the New Testament numerous promises of 
the Spirit, having the nature of covenants and warrants 
for the exercise of faith on the part of the beneficiaries of 
these covenants. It will be necessary to ascertain who 
were the designated beneficiaries of each several provision 
of these covenants. 

The traditional view is that the provisions of these cove- 
nants were partly temporary and partly permanent. The 
answer is, Not so; but they are all permanent, and a 
proper faith to-day may realize all these promises, and a 
failure to do so is sinful. We shall see later on how this 
sweeping proposition is attempted to be modified in order 
to escape its total surrender. 

Let us examine these covenants in detail in order to 
differentiate that which was limited and temporary from 
that which was and is permanent and universal, the com- 
mon and certain heritage of every true believer. 

In John xiv. 16, 17, and 25, 26, we have a covenant in 
two sections made definitely with the eleven (for Judas 
had gone to effect the betrayal). The first section prom- 
ises what they already enjoyed in common with all be- 
lievers of all ages, to-wit, “I will pray the Father and he 
shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with 
you forever; even the Spirit of truth; whom the world 
cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth 
him; but ye know him, for he dwelleth in you, and shall 
be in you.” Here Christ promises to insure to them by 


The Covenants of the Spirit. . 55 


his intercession the continued presence of the Holy Spirit, 
whom they already knew by his dwelling in them as the — 
true Spirit. | 

The second part of this covenant (vs. 25, 26) ready 
“These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present 
with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Spirit, 
whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach 
you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, 
whatsoever I have said unto you.” Here the special 
promise of inspiration is made to them, and, by its very 
terms, limited to them. 

This covenant in two sections exemplifies a principle 
already noted. In making a new covenant, it was usual 
to recapitulate the terms of a permanent and universal 
covenant, and then to add such special provisions as made 
the new covenant necessary. 

In John xvi. 8-13 we have substantially the same cove- 
nant expressed more fully, “When he is come (the Com- 
forter), he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteous- 
ness, and of judgment; of sin, because they believe not 
in me; of righteousness, because I go to my Father; of 
judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. I 
have yet many things to say to you, but ye cannot bear 
them now. But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he 
will guide you into all truth; for he shall not speak of 
himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak ; 
and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me, 
for he shall receive of mine, and shew it unto you.” This 
statement of this definite covenant with the eleven consists 
of two sections. The first section reiterates the gracious 
operations or redemptive processes common to all be- 
lievers in all ages; the second section guarantees to them 
that special inspiration which they needed in building up 
the kingdom. This inspiration is certainly theirs by cove- 


56 Modern Mysticism. 


narit, and is not promised to any others at this time and 
place. 

It is gratuitous to say that this promise of inspiration 
was made to the apostles representatively, for all believers, 
for all time. The promise that they should remember 
words spoken by Christ to them, in their hearing with the 
natural ear, cannot apply to any one who did not so hear 
him speak. 

Still there is a warrant for a wider inspiration to be 
given to the rank and file of believers. It is found in the 
prophecies of Joel, as we shall see later on. 

It may not be amiss to note here that the promise of 
inspiration carries with it by implication the promise of 
miracles to attest that inspiration. The two are correlated 
—the promise of either carried with it the promise of the 
other in no doubtful way. But we have more than im- 
plication to guide us in searching out the truth of these 
matters. 

In Luke xxiv. 49 we read, “Behold, I send the promise 
of my Father upon you, but tarry ye in the city of Jeru- 
salem, until ye be endued with power from on high.” 
And in Acts i. 4-8 we read much more fully, “Being 
assembled together with them, (he) commanded them 
that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but to wait 
for the promise of the Father, which, said he, ye have 
heard of me. For John truly baptized with water ; but 
ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days 
hence. When they therefore were come together, they 
asked him plainly, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time 
restore again the kingdom of Israel? And he said unto 
them, It is not for you to know the times and the seasons 
which the Father hath put in his own power. But ye shall 
receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon 
you, and ye shall be witnesses unto me in all Judea, and 
in Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth.” 


The Covenants of the Spirit. 57 


It is evident that this covenant is made with those 
assembled with him, pledging a previous promise made 
also to them, and directing them what to do in certain 
times and at certain places. It has in it none of the ele-_ 
ments of a universal covenant for all times and for all 
assemblages of believers. 

The simplest analysis of this covenant discovers several 
points of supreme interest to them: } 

1. A renewal of the previous promises of the true Gairit 
to be sent by the Father, as already set forth. 

2. The former covenant includes the ordinary opera- 
tions of redemptive grace, and also the necessary and 
certain inspiration to fit them to bear testimony to truth 
which was to be fully revealed through them. 

3. The promise of power from on high by the Spirit to 
work such miracles of knowledge and power as would 
duly attest their God-given messages of truth, and make 
them witnesses to him wherever they should go—wit- 
nesses unimpeached and unimpeachable. 

This renewal of the covenant of the Spirit was a new 
pledge of all that had been previously promised, and in 
addition, the special pledge of miraculous powers with 
which to attest their promised inspiration. This will be 
more eyident as we proceed to note the speedy fulfilment 
of this covenant. 

In Acts ii. 1-4 we read, “When the day of Pentecost 
was fully come, they were all with one accord in one 
place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven 
as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house 
where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them 
cloven tongues as of fire, and it sat upon each one of them. 
And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began 
to speak with tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.” 

When we read the whole story of Pentecost we plainly 


58 Modern Mysticism. 


see the threefold fulfilment of all that was promised in the 
several covenants given by Christ as already quoted: 
1. The inspired preaching. 2. The miraculous attestation. 
3. The operations of grace in the hearts of three thousand 
hearers. | 

We must not confound the baptism of the Spirit that 
came upon the assembly of believers with the “washing of 
regeneration and the renewal of the Holy Ghost,” which 
was received by the hearers. The last was the work of 
the Spirit in personal salvation, the redemptive processes 
which are the same in all ages; the baptism of the Spirit 
was the special equipment of the apostles and others with 
power, both inspiration and miracle. 

Now in John vii. 39 we read, “The Holy Ghost was not 
yet given, for Jesus was not yet glorified.” The exact 
meaning of the context is not clear, but there is no doubt 
that John refers to the great covenant which was fulfilled, 
after the resurrection and ascension, at Pentecost. 

We read again in John xx. 21-23, “As the Father hath 
sent me, so send I you. And when he had said this he 
breathed on them, and said unto them, Receive ye the Holy 
Ghost. Whosoever sins ye retain, they are retained.” 
This gift of the Holy Spirit antedated his ascension and 
glorification; it antedated Pentecost, and antedated even 
the command to “wait for the promise of the Father” ; 
and it is evidently limited to the official functions noted. 

Besides, the disciples were not without the Holy Ghost 
in a proper sense before any of these covenants, as quoted, 
were uttered: for whatever of piety the disciples had be- 
fore Pentecost was the Spirit’s gracious work, and what- 
ever of miracles they wrought, the twelve and the seventy, 
it was by the self-same Spirit by whom they wrought at 
Pentecost and afterward; by the self-same Spirit by 
whom Christ did cast out devils, and whom the Jews 


\ 


The Covenants of the Spirit. 59 


blasphemed when they ascribed the miracles wrought by 
the Holy Ghost to satanic agency and power. 

Just here we may be permitted to emphasize the fact 
that the name of the Holy Ghost is often used technically - 
for the miracles which he wrought through Christ and 
his apostles. We shall see that his name is so used 
throughout the book of Acts whenever reference is made 
to extraordinary spiritual gifts. 

We find another limited covenant of the Spirit in Luke 
xii. 11, 12, ““‘When they bring you into the synagogues, 
and before magistrates, and powers, take no thought how 
or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say: for 
the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye 
ought to say.” This was inspiration for an exigency. 

In Mark xvi. 15-18 there is a more comprehensive form 
of the covenant: some dispute its genuineness, but agree 
that it does not violate the analogy of Scripture, “Go ye 
into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he 
that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall 
follow them that believe; in my name shall they cast out 
devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall 
take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it 
shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and 
they shall recover.” The first part of this covenant is the 
great commission—the marching orders of the church. 
This was substantially the commission given to the saints 
of all ages—the great missionary covenant of the Bible, 
permanent and universal. It was formally renewed and 
enjoined by Christ when he committed the continuation of 
his work to the little band who believed on him. They 
needed the miraculous powers, so graphically pledged, in 
order to insure the initial success of his kingdom. Com- 
pare Luke x. 19, and Acts xxvill. 3. 


60 Modern Mysticism. 


Now if there be no limitations to the terms of this 
extraordinary covenant, the most ardent claimant of su- 
pernatural power by faith to-day is living very far short 
of his privileges. 

Now there is no question that this splendid warrant was 
fulfilled in the first generation of Christians, just as Christ 
foreshowed when he said, “He that believeth in me the 
works that I do shall he do also, and greater works than 
these shall he do because I go to my Father, and whatso- 
ever ye shall ask the Father in my name, that will 1 do, 
that the Father may be glorified in the Son.” 

There is still one covenant to be quoted, spoken by the 
Lord through his prophet Joel, ii. 28-31, “And it shall 
come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit on 
all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall proph- 
esy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men 
shall see visions ; and also upon the servants and the hand- 
’ maids in those days will I pour out my Spirit, and I will 
show wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and 
fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into 
blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord shall 
come. And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call 
on the Lord shall be delivered; for in Mount Zion and 
in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the Lord hath said, 
and in the remnant whom the Lord shall call.” This is the 
same promise, in substance, of the same Holy Ghost, made 
by the same Lord just before his ascension; and accord- 
ing to Peter it was fulfilled at Pentecost. Here also that 
which has been permanent in all ages was repeated and 
emphasized, “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the 
Lord shall be saved.” 

That which was peculiar and specific in the various 
spiritual covenants quoted is not to be found in the nature 
of the things promised, but in their wonderful prevalence. 


The Covenants of the Spirit. 61 


In the Old Testament economy the Spirit of prophecy and 
the evidential miracle had been largely limited to recog- 
nized officials, such as priest and prophet, and they had 
enjoyed and used these functions by virtue of their office, | 
and as essential functions thereof. But at Pentecost and 
afterwards they were conferred on large numbers, irre- 
spective of age, sex, or official position, so that it would 
seem that the first generation of believers constituted an 
inspired and miracle-working church in her witness bear- 
ing for Christ. 

These extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost are called 
after his name throughout the book of Acts. Paul calls 
them spiritual gifts. Theologians call them charisms, be- 
-cause of their gratuitous distribution. 

These charisms were exceedingly numerous and diver- 
sified in their nature and mode of exercise—they spake 
with tongues; they prophesied; they interpreted; they 
healed the sick; they cast out devils; they raised the 
dead; they were delivered from peril; deadly poison 
from within and without was neutralized; the adder was 
harmless; and power was exercised by a word, by laying 
on of hands, by anointing with oil, and by the scattering 
of handkerchiefs and other tokens which had touched the 
person of the miracle-worker. Such extent, variety, and 
number of supernatural signs and wonders, both of know- 
ledge and power, had never been witnessed in any one 
generation, nor, perhaps, in all the generations previous. 

These charisms of the Spirit were conferred in two 
ways. At Pentecost the baptism and power came from on 
high with outward manifestations that powerfully affected 
the senses. The words of Christ, found in Mark ix. I 
were then fulfilled, “There be some of them that stand 
here that shall not taste death till they have seen the king- 
dom of God come with power’; or as Matthew puts it, 


62 Modern Mysticism. 


till.they have seen the Son of Man coming in his king- 
dom.” This cannot mean his “second coming,” but his 
coming to establish the kingdom with power through the 
Holy Spirit, and through his disciples, as promised in Acts 
i. 1-4, the fulfilment of all which began with Pentecost. 

It may not be out of place here to note in passing that 
the adherents of the school of thought under investigation 
place their doctrine of the second coming—the parousia— 
at the centre of their system, and the same principles of 
interpretation are necessary to all their conclusions; and 
their whole system falls to the ground if we can find one 
single instance of his promised coming which has had its 
fulfilment already, as in the case just quoted. We do 
greatly need some one to discuss the parousia as set forth 
in the Scriptures, with all the various meanings and limi- 
tations thereof. 

To return to the trend of our discussion: These char- 
isms, or the Holy Ghost, descended suddenly and unex- 
pectedly, as at Pentecost, on Cornelius and his Gentile 
associates while Peter was preaching to them. Other 
stich cases, if there were any, are not recorded. But in 
the ordinary administration, these gifts were conferred by 
the laying on of the hands of the apostles, and were not 
sought and obtained by faith and prayer. The apostles 
not only enjoyed the charisms themselves, but it was an 
apostolic function to confer these gifts on others. Philip 
preached at Samaria, himself “full of the Holy Ghost,” 
and wrought “signs” and “miracles,” and many believed 
and were baptized; and “there was great joy in that city.” 
The Spirit was there mightily in his convicting and con- 
verting power; but there was a sense in which they had 
not yet received him, for the “Holy Ghost was not yet 
fallen on them.” Therefore, Peter and John, two apostles, 
went down and “laid hands on them and! they received 


The Covenants of the Spirit. — 63 


the Holy Ghost.” Simon, the sorcerer, recognized this 
apostolic function, and offered to purchase it with money, 
saying, “Give me this power, that on whomsoever I lay 
my hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.” All of which. 
is recorded in Acts viii. 1-24. 

In Acts xix. 1-7 we learn that when Paul came to 
Ephesus he found certain disciples, twelve of whom were 
men, and he said, “Have ye received the Holy Ghost since 
ye believed?” and they answered, “We have not so much 
as heard if there be any Holy Ghost.” That is, they had 
not heard of the special covenant of the gifts of the Holy 
Ghost. They had believed in Christ under John’s preach- 
ing, and had John’s baptism only. Nor is this the only 
case of such disciples, who were true believers. When 
Paul explained the matter they were baptized in the name 
of the Lord Jesus. “And when Paul had laid hands on 
them the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with 
tongues and prophesied.” 

Now we must not suppose that all these charisms were 
conferred upon each and every recipient, but that they 
were distributed singly or in groups as they were needed 
for the purposes given, and in such measure as the Spirit 
saw fit. In 1 Cor. xii. 4-12 Paul tells us of diversities of 
gifts, differences of administration, diversities of opera- 
tions and manifestations of the Spirit; and after enumer- 
ating the gifts (vs. 8-11) he says, “But all these worketh 
that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man as 
he will.” 

It is now competent for us fo assert that the first gene- 
ration of believers did enjoy the dispensation of the Spirit 
in wondrous measure, for setting up the kingdom with 
power: and it continued certainly till the canon of Scrip- 
ture was closed, and divinely authenticated, and accepted 
by the church, while the gifts of wisdom, and of know- 


64 Modern Mysticism. 


ledge, and of discerning of spirits still remained (1 Cor. 
xii. 8-10). After all this was accomplished, it ceased 
and ceased entirely: the warrant and the need were ful- 
filled and it expired by limitation. 

There are some who think and teach otherwise. We 
shall consider their contention in the next. 


CHAPTER VI. 
Is MopErRN Mysticism SCRIPTURAL? 


T was claimed in the last chapter that the charisms of 
the Spirit which were so generally distributed in the 
New Testament generation of believers were not intended 
to be permanent, and that they did actually pass away. 
They were needed for the completion of the canon of 
Scripture, for its attestation, and for its acceptance. All 
this was done while the gifts of wisdom, and of know- 
ledge, and of discerning of spirits, still remained. From 
this source the canon of the New Testament comes to us 
divinely authenticated, and we need no inductive pro- 
cesses to determine canonicity, nor to justify its accept- 
ance. 

We have shown that these covenants of inspiration and 
miracle were limited in the very terms of their delivery 
to certain persons, times, places or conditions, and for 
certain purposes, and in no sense representatively for all 
persons, times, places or conditions. We have seen also 
that these gifts constitute no part of the redemptive pro- 
cesses in the human soul. We have seen also that they 
were in no sense the test and measure of a personal holi- 
ness. We have seen, further, that they were conferred 
in two ways — twice by direct descent from heaven, ac- 
companied by startling manifestations perceived by the 
senses, but usually by the laying on of the hands of the 
apostles — and the conferring of them was an apostolic 
function. The overwhelming presumption, therefore, is 
that they ceased when they had fulfilled their obvious 
purpose, and when all apostolic functions ceased in the 
church. To claim the contrary would throw the burden 


66 Modern Mysticism. 


of proof on those so claiming, which they do attempt, as 
we shall see. 

In 1 Corinthians, chapters xii., x1il. and xiv., Paul dis- 
cusses the relative value of these extraordinary gifts as 
compared with the graces of the Spirit. This discussion 
was made necessary by the disorder and irregularities 
which grew out of the overweening assumptions and the 
spiritual pride of many who had received these gifts. 
They exalted that which was incidental and temporary 
above the very substance and essence of salvation. It is 
sad to note that those who claim these and similar gifts 
to-day as an essential part of a higher life do also mani- 
fest similar spiritual pride, and similar disorder and 
irregularities. Paul here clearly shows that these gifts 
might be absolutely valueless to the possessor, profiting 
him nothing. He shows that at their best they are not 
to be compared with the graces of the spirit, which he 
sums up in faith, hope and love. He says that these three 
shall abide. Abide where? In eternity? No! but in the 
church on earth, for faith and hope certainly belong to 
the earthly administration of grace, and not to heaven, 
“Where faith is sweetly lost in sight, and hope in full 
supreme delight, and everlasting love.’ And even the 
love which he says will abide is not the everlasting love 
of heaven, but the love we are to cherish and cultivate 
toward others in this life, as he so beautifully sets forth 
in chapter xiii., vs. 4-7; and which Drummond describes 
as the “most beautiful thing in the world.” 

Paul, in the same connection, says, “Whether there be 
prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they 
shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish 
away.” When? Ina future life? No! He does put in 
a caveat here to assure us that our knowledge shall be 
perfected there. But his obvious and necessary meaning 


Is Modern Mysticism Scriptural? 67 


is that inspiration and miracle should cease, and that faith, 
hope and love should remain in the church. 

It would be pertinent here to consider whether the 
exegesis which limits the extent and duration of Pente- 
costal gifts to that generation is borne out by history and 
by the logic of events. The apostles were the interme- 
diaries in some form of all these charisms of the Spirit. 
The apostles were all dead by the close of the century, 
and they had no successors. There is no evidence of a 
new administration for the continuance of the gifts. 

The early fathers differ as to the time when these gifts 
ceased entirely in the church. This is just as we might 
expect, because some on whom these gifts were conferred 
by the laying on of apostolic hands may have lived and 
exercised their gifts, and doubtless did so do, till the mid- 
dle of the second century, and even later. John, the last 
of the apostles, did not die till near the close of the first 
century. 

There are sporadic later reports of prophecy and mira- 
cle which may be accounted for and explained. But the 
consensus of the fathers is that they did cease in the 
second century. And yet during the next two or three 
hundred years we find the noblest type of heroic Chris- 
tianity — sustained by faith — great armies of martyrs, 
who did not rely on carnal weapons, nor on any visible 
supernatural agency. The God of providence and the God 
of grace was their stay and support, just as we preach 
to-day. 

Later on, however, the papacy, having invented and set 
up the claim to apostolic succession, in the literal sense 
that every Pope was a true and scriptural apostle, soon 
claimed inspiration in the form of infallibility, and thus 
fell heir to all the warrants and functions given to apos- 
tles in the Scriptures, and a great deal more, for usurpers 


68 “Modern Mysticism. 


recognize no legitimate limits to their usurpations. And 
for centuries they imposed upon an ignorant and credu- 
lous world their lying signs and wonders; as they still 
do in many quarters. And their bishops still lay on hands 
and say, in arrogant blasphemy, “Receive ye the Holy © 
Ghost.” That mystery of iniquity is at least consistent 
after usurping apostolic office and functions. We believe 
this apostacy and delusion was clearly foretold in both 
Testaments; but there is no need to refer to it further 
at this time. 

We are confronted to-day with the counter claims of 
mysticism, which we must needs examine. 

What is Mysticism ? 

There is a recognized mystic element in all religions. 
It includes certain most intimate relations which exist, or 
are supposed to exist, between God and man, and is the 
basis of all communion and fellowship between the divine 
and the human. In the religion of Christ we believe in 
the mystic union of Christ and the believer, and this is 
something more than the headship. It has various stages, 
beginning with the eternal decree that gave us to Christ, 
then the incarnation, then regeneration, followed by the 
conscious exercise of faith, and finished when we shall 
‘see himas he is. This mystic union is a covenant relation, 
and more. It is a vital relation as of the branches to the 
vine. It is a peculiar relation, analogous to the oneness 
of the Father and the Son, and is the condition of a true 
communion and fellowship. But in all this the doctrine 
and the facts are perceived only by faith resting in the 
Word. Neither Christ, nor the body formed by this mys- 
tical union, nor any of the relations growing out of it, are 
perceived by any external sense, or by any internal sense, 
or by any subjective consciousness. It is discovered and 
held only by faith, and is confirmed in our experience by 
the proper fruits thereof. | 


Is Modern Mysticism Scriptural? 69 


This mystical union with Christ must not be confounded 
with the indwelling of the Spirit, though it is intimately 
connected with it. This indwelling is also a real, though 
mystical and peculiar fact, and is as much the necessary 
portion of any believer as the mystical union with Christ. 
This doctrine and fact also is perceived and held only by 
faith; and neither the Holy Spirit himself, nor any mode 
of his indwelling, nor any gracious operation connected 
therewith, is discernible by any external or internal sense. 
The doctrine and the fact are known only by faith resting 
on the Scriptures, and then confirmed by the proper fruits 
of the indwelling. These two doctrines are the mystic 
element in the Christian religion. 

But what is Mysticism? Every form of error takes 
hold of some truth or truths, which are usually funda- 
mental, and exaggerates them out of their true propor- 
tions, and ignores all their proper limitations. That which 
is built thereon is at best a species of caricature. 

Mysticism antedates Christ. Its fullest expression was 
Brahminism; it was distinctly pantheistic. It taught that 
the union of the human and divine is so intimate that the 
human will is at last assimilated to the divine will. Their 
state of Nirvana after death would seem to be a total 
annihilation of all that is human in the union, and the 
reabsorption of the divine into absolute and infinite 
divinity. Their highest caste was an esoteric circle that 
cultivated virtue and noble destiny by withdrawal from 
the world, by quiet seclusion for meditation and by 
ascetic habits, in order to hasten the subordination of the 
human and the exaltation of the divine. 

We are concerned, however, with Christian mysticism. 
We find it springing up now and then in various sects 
during the centuries, with changing claims and manifesta- 
tions. It usually started as a revolt against dogma, and 


70 Modern Mysticism. 


especially against a formal, if not a dead orthodoxy, and 
demanded a higher spiritual life. 

These mystical sects have laid claim to a superior holi- 
ness which often times, in its manifestations, has put the 
average piety of the church to the blush. These all have 
professed to enjoy the enlightening of the Holy Ghost 
which constituted them an esoteric circle, sometimes retit- 
ing out of sight of the world to escape its pollutions and 
to cultivate a meek and quiet assimilation to the divine 
holiness; and sometimes obtruding themselves upon and 
against the established order of things with the wildest 
extravagance —a sort of religious anarchism — claiming 
the infallible witness of the Spirit for it all, and rejecting 
all authority over them, whether civil or ecclesiastical. 
They have been in the main devoid of charity, fanatical, 
and full of spiritual pride. These sects have arisen and 
passed away to reappear in altered garb as the centuries 
pass; but they all have seemed to agree in claiming for 
themselves certain spiritual endowments and testimonies 
not warranted in the Scriptures. 

It would be interesting to trace the rise of some of these 
sects; the gnosticism of the third and fourth centuries 
was the legitimate product of the mystic philosophy of 
Plato; and monasticism was borrowed from the mystics 
of India. In the twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth cen- 
turies the mystics were the great opponents of the school- 
men and their philosophy. In the seventeenth century 
began the struggles of the Jesuits with the Jansenists, a 
powerful mystical sect, and then the Quietists under the 
leadership of Molinos in Spain and Madame Guyon in 
France. Quietism laid great stress upon the inner life, 
and the union of the soul with God, and taught that our 
wills may be entirely lost in the will of God and that 
entire sanctification is possible in this life. They dispar- 


Ts Modern Mysticism Scriptural? va 


aged church authority and exercises, exalted the individ- 
ual, and reached the baldest antinomianism, both in 
doctrine and practice. During the Reformation the Ana- 
baptists and other mystic sects threw all Europe into great 
commotion, and declared actual war on all authority and 
government, both church and state, and one hundred 
thousand of them perished in the various disorders they 
excited. | 

There is no need here to advert to the mystic element 
in Quakerism and in the earlier Methodism. We are 
dealing only with more modern forms. 

Fifty years ago many were fascinated with the claims 
and teachings of the Plymouth Brethren, of which Inglis 
was the exponent in this country; and his paper, The 
Witness, seemed to have more spiritual religion in it than 
all the other religious papers combined. But in his other 
paper, Waymarks in the Wilderness, was found his relig- 
ious system, which proposed to keep the “unity of the 
Spirit” in view of a divided Christendom. They professed 
to rely upon the “coming of the Lord Jesus” as the present 
hope of the church, and to be animated and directed by 
the presence of the Holy Ghost. They admitted to com- 
munion and fellowship only those who put away and 
rejected all error by the word of God, and by the help of 
the ever-blessed Spirit. They greatly disparaged church 
organization and government, and spake evil of dignities. 
But, alas! their unity has failed them, and the Brethren do 
not dwell together in unity. Still their tenets survive in 
various forms and combinations. 

Within thirty years past there has sprung to the front 
an intellectual mysticism which boasteth great things, 
claiming to test truth and discern spirits by subjective 
processes, and by a critical sense. While they minimize 
‘inspiration and miracle, they discern and verify truth by 


72 Modern Mysticism. 


an inner light in the Christian consciousness with a dog- 
matism worthy of a “thus saith the Lord.” By minimiz- 
ing Bible inspiration and maximizing their own they 
really nullify the proper doctrine of the Spirit in his rela- 
tion to truth. 

The fundamental doctrine of mysticism would seem to 
be a belief in such an immediate and continuous commu- 
nication between God and the soul, by means of the Spirit, 
as to furnish an inner light, an illumination of the soul, 
by which Scripture is infallibly understood, prophecy and 
other hidden mysteries made clear, and advanced views of 
truth obtained by anticipation, through the contemplation 
of the divine. 

The most popular form of this mysticism to-day is 
sometimes called Keswickism. We are gravely told that 
no one has a right to define it, because it is a school of 
thought and not a crystalline dogma, a trend rather than 
a consummation, a conscious experience rather than a 
method of exegesis. Its advocates take refuge behind the 
Spirit’s processes, and practically refuse to come to the 
bar of logical investigation which savors so much of 
worldly wisdom. The popular presentation of it is so 
sweet and fascinating, and the use of Bible language so 
apt and striking, that the sympathetic reader is delighted 
and entranced, especially if he accepts the terms used and 
the Scriptures quoted in their accustomed sense. And if 
he surrenders a loyal and loving heart to the pleasing pre- 
sentation of the quantum of real spiritual truth presented, 
he wonders how any one can dissect their writings in a 
cold-blooded way, as a heresy hunter, even if he does not 
agree with all that is written. 

It need hardly be said that it has been no uncommon 
thing for heresiarchs to exhibit the most wonderful enthu- 
siasm, zeal and consecration, and even spirituality. This 


Is Modern Mysticism Scriptural? 73 


was preéminently true of the Pietists, the Quietists, the 
Plymouth Brethren, and many others. 3 

But the careful reader who seeks to “prove all things 
and hold fast to that which is good” readily discovers that 
their writers hold views widely different from his own; 
and he finds, further, that these strange views are held 
with a dogmatism worthy of any lover of creeds; and 
you are fortunate if you escape a lash of scorpions pre- 
pared for those who do not say, Amen. 

The school of thought indicated we prefer to call 


Modern Mysticism, rather than by any one of several ~~ 


names that might be given it, according to its varied 
phases and various promoters. It is not limited to any 
branch of the church of Christ, but seeks to revivify the 
dead orthodoxy of all the churches. It holds conferences 
and conventions, and frequents the platforms of chatau- 
quas, summer schools, and biblical institutes. It expresses 
no desire, for the present at least, to organize into a sepa- 
rate church life, for they make war on what they call 
ecclesiasticism; and a separate organic church life would 
at once fence them out of green pastures. 

They claim toleration by all churches and under all 
creeds as the advocates of non-essentials; but they boldly 
preach their views as the very fundamental truths of 
Christianity, and make open war on old-fashioned evan- 
gelical orthodoxy, and charge upon the churches a low 
_and groveling form of Christian life and attainment. 

Lay evangelism, and professional evangelism, in its 
various forms, have furnished the leading votaries and 
propagandists of this mystical school. They disregard the 
doctrine of governments, and of laying on of hands, and 
submit to ecclesiastical authority only so far as conven- 
lence or expediency may dictate. They get their authority 
to preach directly from the Spirit’s call without the call of 


74 7 Modern Mysticism. 


ordained church authority, and profess to exercise their 
calling under his direct guidance. In the exercise of a 
broad charity and brotherly love, they work in any church 
that may be open to their unauthorized and irresponsible 
teaching, but prefer the union and cooperation of all the 
churches where they go, for whose “spiritual uplift,” and 
at whose expense, they love to labor. 

They also profess to have received their qualifications 
to preach from the Scriptures under the teaching of the 
Spirit, rather than in schools of scholastic and theological 
learning. They claim that their wonderful popularity, 
and their hundreds and thousands of confessions and 
reclamations are due to the fact that they preach a purer 
and more powerful gospel; and they claim that such 
success is the divine attestation of themselves and their 
message. 

It may not be amiss to note that the Young Men’s 
Christian Association, with its powerful organization and 
its immense possibilities for good, is falling more and 
more under the influence of this propagandism. 

Modern mysticism is a bold and fearless interpreter of 
prophecy, and the acceptance of their interpretations is 
made the condition of the higher forms of Christian life. 
It makes assurance of the essence of faith, and claims the 
direct personal witness of the Spirit to a state of grace. 
It claims the revelation of prayer answered in advance of 
the time and place of the actual answer. It offers divine 
healing by faith without the use of means. 

Its crowning tenet is perfection in holiness in this life 
by a sudden process called the second blessing, complete 
sanctification, or the infilling of the Spirit; and they make 
great use of the catchy phrase “the Spirit-filled life.” 
Some teach that the days of miracles are not passed, and 
that inspiration also is in the reach of a strong faith. 
These things and others are all akin, and are logically 


Is Modern Mysticism Scriptural? 75 


related to each other, and depend on the view taken of the 
Spirit’s office work in redemption. No two followers of 
this school will agree with each other, much less with my 
statement of their tenets. 7 

This school carries its mysticism into their whole theory 
of the exegesis of the Scriptures. The Jewish doctors of 
the Cabala, following an elaborate system of ingenious 
conceits, found in the Scriptures a wonderful system of — 
hidden truth not discoverable to a profane literal, gram- 
matical, and logical exegesis. The mystics of the third 
and fourth centuries introduced the spiritualizing method 
into the study of the Scriptures, until it appeared that 
every fact of the history, every ordinance of worship, 
every parable and miracle, had a mystical and spiritual 
meaning of which the literal was the mere shell or form. 
This has been the approved principle of exegesis of the 
mystics of all ages. Modern mystics have given a new 
impulse and a more fascinating scope to a spiritualizing 
exegesis. They substitute their own subjective conceits 
for the common-sense, obvious and surface meanings of 
Scripture, and claim that they are taught of the Spirit. 
This claim makes their exegesis as infallible as the original 
Scripture when the mouth of the Lord had spoken it. 

If the warrant for the spiritual gifts of early Chris- 
tianity are still in force, they are in force in their entirety, 
and the same gifts and powers may be expected to fall 
from on high at any time and on any believer, or they may 
be conferred by the laying on of some apostolic hand, 
without reference to the personal faith and holiness of the 
recipient, and that, too, without divorcing inspired witness 
bearing for Christ from the miracle which is necessary to 
attest the witness and his message. 

_ We shall consider in the next the reply they make to 
our argument as we shall consider their tenets more in 
detail. 


CHAPTER VIL. 


PLAUSIBLE EvVASIONS—CLASSIFICATION oF Mystic Doc- 
TRINES. 


FTER the discussion of the covenants of the Spirit 

it would seem unnecessary to discuss the claims of 

mysticism further. If inspiration and miracle have ceased, 

there remains scant ground for the mystic to stand upon. 

Mystics, however, attempt to parry the force of our argu- 
ments in several ways. 

1. They reply that much of the literal form of the war- 
rants has been superseded by higher spiritual gifts, of 
which the literal was an inadequate expression. Well, 
how much and which? Shall it be determined and decided 
by the Scriptures or by the spiritualizer? Hardly by the 
Scriptures, because they testify to the literal fulfilment of 
the warrant. They give no promise that the literal should 
be superseded by higher spiritual gifts of which the literal 
gifts were but types. Besides, we shall see that the 
mystics still claim the literal gifts as within the reach of 
the believer by faith, and that these literal gifts are to-day 
of the very essence of the higher life. 

Do the spiritualizers surrender the literal miracle to- 
day? Then how can they hold to the laying on of hands 
and anointing with oil for divine healing? Do they sur- 
render literal inspiration to-day? Then how can they 
claim personal witness and revelation by the Spirit? or 
how can they set up their own Spirit-filled consciousness. 
as the final word of truth? or how shall they convince 
others of their possession of that truth? 

2, It is replied, further, that the Spirit executes the 


Classification of Mystic Doctrines. 77 


warrants in a more limited way, though essentially the 
same, than in the apostolic days, because of changed con- 
ditions and necessities; and that this is authorized to our 
faith by other and later Scriptures. This, however, Stite 
renders the contention as to the warrants already quoted 
and discussed, and pleads other and later warrants. We 
shall discuss this form of the contention in detail as we 
proceed. : 

It would be well to notice here that the mystic in this 
connection recognizes necessary changes in the adminis- 
tration of the Spirit to suit changed conditions and necessi- 
ties. This comports also with our contention and with the 
Scriptures. It is evident that every warrant was given 
for certain purposes and to meet certain conditions and 
necessities. The warrants were exactly fulfilled until 
changed conditions made them no longer necessary, all of 
which has been shown from the Scriptures. 

3. The mystics retort upon our view, that it limits the 
power and grace of God in this day; and they do greatly 
extol the divine power and goodness in his gifts to men, 
and they do greatly emphasize the sin of limiting his 
power and grace by unbelief. Some even tell us that but 
for the almost universal unbelief of the church we would 
enjoy a literal pentecostal blessing all the while. It is not 
amiss to reply just here that no one questions the divine 
power and goodness, but the only question is whether the 
warrants of the Spirit and the promises of the Scriptures 
do justify the claims of the mystics. It is so easy for 
them to assume the very matter in dispute, fortifying it 
by a spiritualizing exegesis, attested to them by the infal- 
lible witness of the Spirit, and then lift up holy hands at 
the unbelief of their brethren. Unbelief in what? Un- 
belief in the Spirit’s witness to their strange exegesis—or 
rather unbelief in the infallibility of the mystic. 


78 Modern Mysticism. 


In order to save words we may here fence the discus- 
sion with some distinctions already made. No one calls in 
question here the ordinary redemptive processes of the 
Spirit, conviction, conversion, regeneration, faith, repent- 
ance, gradual sanctification, spiritual enlightenment 
through the word, all of which are the portion of every 
believer. But the ordinary believer does not recognize the 
personal presence or agency of the Spirit in all these 
redemptive processes. The mystic regards these experi- 
ences as very low attainments in the divine life when the 
Scriptures offer gifts more blessed and glorious. Again, 
no one questions the Spirit’s administration of God’s 
providential government, working all things after the 
counsel of his own will. Every believer, even more than 
the lilies of the field and the fowls of the air, enjoys the 
pledged benefits of this providential government, but he 
does not recognize the presence and the personal agency 
of the Spirit in it all. But the mystic claims more than 
this ordinary providence offers. 


CLASSIFICATION OF Mystic DOCTRINES. 


It would greatly simplify the discussion of the specific 
claims of the school of doctrine we call mysticism if its 
advocates would give us more accurate definitions of them. 
We may safely call them all extraordinary gifts of the 
Spirit, because they go beyond the ordinary, and are not 
received by all believers. 

They would seem to fall easily under three classes. 

1. The doctrines of the Higher life; the Infilling of the 
Spirit; Enduement with power ; Second blessing; Com- 
plete sanctification ; the Complete subjection of the human 
will to the divine will, and the like, would fall under the 
class of redemptive processes extraordinary. 

2. The doctrines of Divine healing; Faith cure; Lay- 


Classification of Mystic Doctrines. 79 


ing on of hands; Anointing with oil, and the like, are 
certainly to be classed as miracles if they are the same 
things we read of in the Scriptures, and which must be 
the same if they are still claimed on the same Scripture. 
warrants. 

3. The following group of spiritual gifts would evi- 
dently fall under the head of inspiration: Personal infal- 
libility; Assurance by direct personal witness of the 
Spirit; Direct revelation of facts; The assured answer to 
prayer in advance of its actual answer; Authoritative ex- 
position of Scripture; Certain revelation of the true intent 
of prophecies, and such like. 

These three classes, Redemptive processes and opera- 
tions extraordinary, Miracles, and Inspiration would seem 
fairly to exhaust all the gifts that the mystic claims. 

It is claimed that any one or all of these things is at- 
tained by an act of faith—and such attainment is the 
measure of the divine life in the soul. This would be true 
no doubt of complete sanctification if it, like justification, 
were in reach of an act of faith. But we have already seen 
that inspiration and miracle were never the index or 
measure of the divine life in the soul. 

Again. All these gifts as claimed by the mystic seem 
to end on self, and benefit others only incidentally, while 
all extraordinary gifts, official or personal, as set forth in 
the Scriptures, were conferred mainly for the benefit of 
others and only incidentally for self. 

Again, the miracle in the creed of the mystic loses its 
evidential character, attesting the inspired messenger and 
the message, and no mystic proposes to. stake the truth of 
his teaching upon his power to heal the sick, much less to 
raise the dead. 

_ We may note again, the plausibilities of the mystic gain 
their strength from the constant intermingling of the 


80 Modern Mysticism. 


promises of the Scriptures, both pertinent and impertinent, 
and he fails to differentiate that which is permanent and 
universal from that which was limited and temporary. 

There is still a mystic philosophy of the new birth which 
is much emphasized in some quarters and by which they 
explain all their claims. They start with a false view of 
the person of Christ. Instead of recognizing two natures 
in him, each perfect and complete without mixture or 
modification of either, they recognize in him a mixed 
nature which they call the Divine-human, in which the 
human is dominated by the divine. They argue that each 
new-born soul, born of God, becomes an actual partaker of 
the divine nature, and is like Christ in having a mixed 
nature, Divine-human; and the Divine must dominate the 
human until the human will is lost in the Divine will; and 
in such case all things are as possible to him as to God 
himself in the same relations and conditions. This, how- 
ever, is a distinct pantheistic philosophy, and does not 
agree with the ordinary rationale of mysticism. The 
ordinary mystic adopts substantially the teaching of Brah- 
minical mysticism—that the divine Spirit dwells in the 
human spirit separately and yet conjointly, without con- 
fusion or admixture, until the divine finally dominates 
and even extirpates the human, and then every possibility 
is attainable. This has much more of the semblance of 
the Scripture teaching, though it varies materially from 
the scriptural doctrine of the indwelling. 

We have seen that the entire doctrines of mysticism fall 
into three several classes, but the classification is ours, not 
theirs. The principles that would settle all these have 
been canvassed so far as they underlie these three several 
groups and run through them as a whole. 

The mystic, however, seldom seeks to set up his doc- 
trines by pervasive and underlying principles, but he 


Classification of Mystic Doctrines. SI 


argues each article of his creed without reference to its 
logical coherency, or to the proportion of faith; and he 
quotes special warrants for each from the Scriptures. He 
is specially fond of what he calls Scripture readings, 
culled from all parts of the Bible, and skillfully arranged 
to suit his purpose. He carefully notes or ignores time, 
place and conditions; he follows a literal or spiritualizing 
method as will best set up his views, and he claims for his - 
conclusions the conscious witness of the Spirit, which 
witness he denies to those who reject his teachings. His 
methods have all the appearance of special pleading to 
support his foregone subjective conclusions. 


CHAPTER VIE 


THE WITNESS OF THE SPIRIT.—REVELATIONS BY THE 
SPIRIT. 


E shall now take up in detail some of his doctrines 
beginning in the inverse order of our classification. 

The third class: Assurance by direct personal witness 
of the Spirit; Attestation of the answer to prayer before 
the actual answer; Direct revelation of facts; A con- 
scious revelation of the meaning of Scripture, and espe- 
cially of unfulfilled prophecies; The unfolding of truth 
in the Christian consciousness, and such like. These are 
properly called inspiration under the definition. 

1. The conscious personal witness of the Spirit to our 
sonship. They start with the doctrine that, Assurance is 
of the essence of faith; that a mere hope is a very low 
attainment; that all hope that comes from subjective ex- 
perience is sinful and self-righteous legalism; that assur- 
ance comes from two sources, the act of faith and the 
conscious witness of the Spirit about which there can be 
no mistake. 

Now there are two sources of spiritual knowledge. 
One is faith. Faith accepts the written word, and all 
matters affecting our spiritual weal or woe are finally de- 
cided by it. The other source of knowledge is the witness 
of the Spirit, for there is a real witness of the Spirit. 
But this is not a revelation. The Spirit works in the 
believer all the redemptive graces, and also the fruits of 
good living. We are conscious of the exercise of these 
graces, exactly and only, as we are conscious of any other 
subjective activity. Then these graces, if genuine, will 


The Witness of the Spirit. 83 


bear proper fruits. John the Baptist said, “Bring forth 
therefore fruits meet for repentance.” James says, “Faith 
without works is dead.” John says, “We know we have 
passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren.” 
Paul says, “The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long- 
suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temper- 
ance; against such there is no law.’ Christ says, “Ye 
shall know them by their fruits.” But is there no subjec- 
tive witness of the Spirit? Paul says, “The Spirit itself 
beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of 
God.” Certainly, his graces wrought in us by himself, 
and their proper fruits, all verified and tested by the word 
under his guidance, do constitute his blessed witness to 
our sonship. This is the more evident when we note the 
context in Romans vii. 16, where Paul speaks of this wit- 
ness; for it is there evident that he teaches nothing dif- 
ferent from himself as already quoted, nor from John, 
nor James, nor Christ. This real witness of the Spirit to 
our sonship is, therefore, not a conscious personal com- 
munication, but he bears witness by and through the 
graces and the fruits of righteousness, which he works 
in us. 

2. The mystic also claims the revelation of facts, of new 
truth in the Christian consciousness, and the assurance of 
the answer of prayer before the actual answer. These are 
all claims of actual inspiration if they mean anything more 
than the ordinary enlightenment of the Spirit, and the 
confidence inspired by a childlike faith. 

3. Along with these place their claim to the infallible 
attestation of the Spirit to the true meaning of Scripture, 
including prophecy. They certainly do claim his teaching, 
consciously received from him as an infallible witness. 
Questions of exegesis settled in this way are no longer 
open questions. 


84 Modern Mysticism. 


In order to justify these several claims of extraordinary 
enlightenment by the conscious personal teaching of the 
Spirit, they quote this passage (John vii. 17), “If any 
man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine whether 
it be of God or whether I speak of myself.’’ The context 
shows that Christ is here speaking of the origin of his 
teaching, and not of any infallible exposition of it, and 
besides he is applying a truism, that a loyal obedient heart 
‘is open to rational conviction, while a disobedient and 
rebellious temper is the stronghold of unbelief. 

They quote this passage also (1 Cor. ii. 14), “The 
natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit; for 
they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, 
for they are spiritually discerned.”’ Does this passage give 
the mystic their much vaunted spiritual discernment? 
The apostle here is comparing the natural man and the 
regenerated man. Every believer enjoys spiritual dis- 
cernment, every unbeliever not. 

They quote also Psalm cxix. 18, “Open thou mine eyes 
that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law.” Now 
this passage teaches that the law—the written Word—is 
the source and fountain of knowledge, and the ability to 
see and understand is given by the Spirit. 

And so with a large number of similar passages which 
justify the orthodox view of the Spirit’s work of enlight- 
enment in our effectual calling. 

If the mystic is allowed to appropriate all such passages 
as these to justify his claims of special revelation, then 
there is left to the ordinary believer no benefit from the 
indwelling of the Spirit. We cannot allow this perversion 
and abuse of the real mystical element in our religion— 
the common heritage of all. 

We may say further, if the mystic is satisfied that he 
has the witness of the Spirit, consciously and infallibly 


The Witness of the Spirit. 85 


received, and that on evidence satisfactory to himself, this 
is a matter purely personal to himself; and he has no 
right to insist that others shall receive this witness on his 
own statement; but he must stand prepared to authenti- 
cate the same by miracles. If he fail of this he may be 
sure that his subjective conceits will be rejected, and that 
the Spirit hath not spoken by him. 


CHAPTER IX. 
DIVINE HEALING. 


E may now examine the mystic’s claims of the 
second class: Divine healing; Faith cure; Laying 
on of hands; Anointing with oil, and the like. We may 
consider these all as one. The laying on of hands, and the 
anointing with oil are confessedly mere outward forms 
which may or may not attend the divine healing, having 
‘n themselves no real, inherent efficacy. The doctrine of 
the divine healing is this, that faith is the condition of the 
healing of the sick, with or without the use of means, 
preferably without the use of remedies, for only in this 
way have we assurance of direct divine agency, and so 
give God all the glory. They virtually surrender all other 
miraculous gifts as promised in the covenants of the 
Spirit, and enumerated in Mark xvi. 15-18, not so much 
because they are convinced of the limitations of those cov- 
enants as because cases of healing are the only cases of 
miiacle they can present apparently well authenticated. 
It is not surprising, therefore, that they base their claims 
on other Scriptures, general and specific. 

Their general warrants are found in such passages as 
these: Matthew xxi. 21, 22, “Verily I say unto you, If ye 
have faith and doubt not, ye shall not only do that which 
is done to this fig-tree, but if ye shall say to this mountain, 
be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be 
done, and all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer 
believing, ye shall receive.” The context shows that 
Christ was giving the apostles a renewed warrant for the 
faith of miracles, a last lesson, and he was giving no uni- 
versal covenant for the prayer of faith. 


sp 


Divine Healing. 87 


There are, however, numerous warrants given for 
prayer which seem absolute in their provisions if only we 
pray in faith. These are all quoted by the mystics in 
support of their contention for divine healing. They 
overlook the fact that the word faith introduces a vital 
limitation to the answer of prayer. Faith is presumption 
if we have no promise, and that promise in the word, for 
faith to plead and rest upon. There are two classes of 
warrants—we may plead with absolute faith all promises 
of spiritual blessings, and the need is satisfied. We are 
encouraged to bring all our desires about temporal things, 
and lay them before our heavenly Father assured they 
shall be given or withheld as it shall be for our good and 
for his glory. Our faith cannot go further than this. 
Many false doctrines of prayer, its value and efficacy, 
prevail, but none perhaps more vicious than this, that our 
subjective desires presented with a subjective confidence, 
called faith, are the measure of God’s answer to prayer. 
This theory of the prayer of faith is the more vicious, 
because it is carried into the realm of personal salvation. 
It is common to quote Mark xi. 24 in support of this view, 
“What things soever you desire, when ye pray, believe 
that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.” Hundreds 
and thousands of confessions are secured in these days, by 
evangelists of the class already noted, by pressing this 
promise out of the context and also beyond the proportion 
of faith. 

They say to the sinner in public and in private, Do you 
not desire to be a Christian? Yes. Do you not desire 
your sins forgiven? Yes. Do you not desire to be saved? 
Yes. Then ask for these things. I have asked and I do 
ask. Don’t you believe God will do what he says? Cer- 

tainly, I can’t doubt that. Then all you have to do is to 
believe that you have these things—that you are a Chris- 


88 | Modern Mysticism. 


tian, that your sins are forgiven, and that you are saved. 
You have only to believe that you have received these 
things and you have them. In the last analysis such con- 
fessions are based on untested desires, uttered prayers, 
and a subjective confidence, with scant reference to 
Scripture warrant. 

This, however, is going beyond the necessities of our 
contention with the mystic concerning his doctrine of 
divine healing or so-called faith cure. 

I have been surprised to find that the great John Owen 
in his wonderful work on the Holy Spirit admits that 
some of the pentecostal gifts of power may possibly re- 
main to the church to be used whenever it may suit the 
divine purpose to call them into action after being long in 
abeyance, and among these the healing of diseases. He 
does not say that such gifts are within the call of the 
prayer of faith whenever desired. Even Kuyper admits 
that divine healing remains to the church, but is limited 
to nervous diseases. 

Perhaps they felt shut in to this admission, because 
there are so many seemingly well authenticated cases of 
faith-cure, especially of nervous disorders. Perhaps it 
would hardly be fair to note in this connection the pecu- 
liarly subtle and indefinable nature of such disorders, Dr. 
Kuyper seems to intimate that they are spiritual in their 
origin, and therefore in the limits of healing by the Spirit, 
for it is certain that really spiritual disorders, and even 
spiritual death are healed only by the Spirit. Nor would 
it be fair perhaps to cite the fact that mind-cure and 
Christian Science lay large claim to cures of the same 
class of diseases; for the ready answer is, They are 
imaginary cures. 

Christian Science, so called, is an idealistic philosophy 
that denies the existence of the material universe. If 


Divine Heahng. 8&9 


there be no material human body, there can be no dis- 
ease. Faith in this tenet is the faith-cure of the Christian 
Scientist. He, or rather she, has dishonestly appropriated 
the nomenclature of Christian mysticism to deceive the 
unwary but devout mystic. So far as it is a philosophy, 
we are not concerned with it in this discussion. So far 
as it adopts the nomenclature and the tenets of mysticism, 

it is sufficiently answered in these pages. | 

The advocate of divine healing, when forced to surren- 
der his claims as based on the general warrants for the 
prayer of faith, makes his final stand behind a few pas- 
sages of Scripture which seem to sustain his doctrine. 
In 2 Chron. xvi. 12 we read that “Asa was diseased in his 
feet until his disease was exceeding great: yet in his dis- 
ease he sought not to the Lord, but to the physicians.” 
Surely the sacred historian intended to cast no slur on 
physicians, for Christ said, “They that be whole need not 
a physician, but they that are sick.” And Paul had Luke 
the beloved physician as his travelling companion on 
account of his infirmity, which infirmity he also besought 
the Lord thrice to remove. It was not removed. Was it 
because of the weakness of Paul’s faith?—Paul, who was 
an expert in the true doctrine of faith cure as practiced 
by the apostles. 

But surely the famous passage in James V. 14-16 
justifies the contention of faith cure, “Ts any sick among 
you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let 
them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name 
of the Lord: and the prayer of faith shall save the sick, 
and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed 
sins, they shall be forgiven him. Confess your faults one 
to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be 
healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man 
availeth much.” 


go Modern M ysticism. 


-If this refers to a supernatural cure effected by faith 
and prayer, it would be sufficient to say that James wrote 
at a time when miracles of tongues and of healing were of 
constant occurrence, and were familiar to their experience. 

If, however, he is giving directions and encouragements 
equally suited for our day, which I am entirely willing to 
concede, and even do rejoice in, as verified in my own 
experience, and in the experience of a mighty host who 
have had these promises verified in themselves and those 
they have loved; then it is well to see just what James 
does promise to the effectual fervent prayer of the right- 
eous, when they ask for one another’s health of body and 
forgiveness of sins. Surely James did not mean to insti- 
tute an opus operatum ordinance called “anointing with 
oil in the name of the Lord,” of efficacious power, nor 
indeed a necessary formula to be followed to insure suc- 
cess, for such a theory would disparage faith as a real 
power to secure the healing. 

It certainly would be simpler to assume that James 
meant to say that the Lord authorizes and even enjoins the 
the use of proper remedies, of which anointing with oil 
was then in general use, and is still so in many climates, 
and even the world over in some diseases, whatever other 
remedies may be used. 

This makes it necessary to indicate the scriptural rela- 
tion between prayer and human effort in the use of means. 
They stand correlated to each other. The ploughman 
breaks his soil, sows his seed, and cultivates diligently, 
and entrusts the whole matter to the God of harvests. 
The parent uses every means he can to rear his child in 
the fear of the Lord, and pleads for God’s blessings on it 
all. When Nehemiah and his people were building the 
walls of Jerusalem, and Sanballat, their wily enemy, was 
expected every moment to make an attack upon them, they 


Divine Healing. gi 


held- their weapons of war in one hand and used their 
trowels with the other, and withal, they cried mightily 
unto God. This is the true correlation of prayer and 
effort in the use of means; work as if it all depended upon 
our efforts, and pray as if everything depended on God. 
To omit effort in the use of means within our power is to 
tempt God foolishly; to omit prayer is to trust in an arm 
of flesh. This principle applies in sickness and in health, 
in things spiritual and in things temporal, in every crisis 
and emergency, and in all the callings of life. Asa made 
no mistake in employing physicians, but he failed to com- 
mit his case to the Lord. 

What is there left on which the mystic can base his doc- 
trine of divine healing? 


CHAPTER X. 


REDEMPTIVE PROCESSES EXTRAORDINARY. 


1. ENDUEMENT WITH POWER. 
2. THE HIGHER LIFE. 
3. THE COMPLETE SURRENDER. 


HERE remains yet one class of doctrines taught and 
claimed by the mystics as attainable, and actually 
attained by some believers. This class embraces, The 
higher life; The infilling of the Spirit; Enduement with 
power; Second blessing; Complete sanctification; The 
complete surrender of the human will to the divine will, 
and perhaps other things substantially included under 
some head of this enumeration. These all differ from the 
two classes already discussed in that they directly claim 
no special inspiration of the Spirit, except as they may 
claim the Spirit’s witness to these attainments, as to their 
genuineness, as against the mere subjective conceits of 
those who are self-deceived or deceived of the devil. Just 
here the mystic element crops out into great prominence. 
These claims are at least analogous to the ordinary 
redemptive processes, and if true are of the same nature 
with them, and we, therefore, call them redemptive pro- 
cesses extraordinary. They are not enjoyed by the 
ordinary believer, and not necessarily by the same believer 
at all times. They are said to be objects of faith, exactly 
as are justification and all the ordinary benefits that do 
accompany or flow from it. 
1. We may consider first the doctrine of Enduement 
with power. The doctrine and the name of it are taken 
from Christ’s command to the eleven as found in Luke 


Redemptive Processes Extraordiary. 93 


xxiv. 49, “Behold I send the promise of my Father unto 
you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem until ye be 
endued with power from on high,” or as expressed more 
fully by Luke, in Acts i. 4-8. We have already seen that 
this special covenant of the Spirit and his work was given 
to those that heard it and was fulfilled “not many days 
hence,” i. ¢., at Pentecost, and that the power promised 
was so much of miraculous power as was necessary to 
their successful witness-bearing in Jerusalem, in all Judea, 
in Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth. 

The mystic spiritualizes this entire passage, even the 
proper names Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. The mystic 
evangelist claims an Enduement with spiritual power so 
to preach and teach that the hearers are compelled to 
come in; and it would seem sometimes that they claim 
for themselves the power that belongs only to the Spirit. 
They say that the ordinary preacher fails of a pentecostal 
blessing only because he does not tarry at his spiritual 
Jerusalem till he is “endued with power from on high.” 
It would be a matter of some interest for them to tell us 
why the preaching of Noah and of Isaiah and of Christ 
himself seemed so barren of results. This doctrine of 
Enduement with power is not offered to the ordinary be- 
liever, but seems to be limited to evangelistic workers, 
either official or unofficial. In fact, they practically abol- 
ish the distinction between official and unofficial evangel- 
ism; and they make a call to such work to depend upon 
the conscious Enduement of power from on high. The 
man or the woman or the child of tender years who is 
conscious of this enduement needs no church call, nor 
any laying on of hands for ordination. Just here again 
we see the reason why so many mystics disparage church 
government and despise dignities. 

They claim, also, that this enduement with power from 


94 Modern Mysticism. 


on high includes in it the necessary qualifications of wis- 
dom and knowledge as well as power. The apostles, say 
they, were “unlearned and ignorant men,” but with this 
enduement with power came all other necessary qualifica- 
tions; and they do pervert these words of James, ‘Wise 
man and endued with knowledge.” 

But is there no difference in the power of preachers of 
the Word as indicated by their different measures of 
success? Certainly. There are diversities of gifts, both 
natural and acquired. Christ says (John 1. 37,30) 55 one 
soweth and another reapeth; I sent you to reap that 
whereon ye bestowed no labor: other men labored, and 
ye are entered into their labor.” John sowed and was 
beheaded; Christ sowed and was crucified: Peter and 
others reaped three thousand souls in one day, and five 
thousand another day, and there were added daily to the 
church of such as should be saved. It was not a matter 
of so-called spiritual power; did Christ have less? did 
Peter have more? 

When the evangelists referred to claim to have con- 
sciously received this enduement with power, and with 
it all necessary wisdom and “enduement with knowledge,” 
they reassert the mystic’s claim to a virtual inspiration 
by the Spirit, and a conscious testimony of the Spirit 
thereto. So here again we find, overlapping, the mystic’s 
claim to a certain and conscious enlightenment by the 
Spirit. This is the fundamental error and vice of all 
mysticism. 

>. We will next consider their doctrine of the Higher 
Life. Here, again, is a lack of clear definition. By the 
process of exclusion we see that it does not mean eternal 
life, for Christ says, “Whosoever believeth in him shall 
not perish, but have eternal life” (John iii. 15, 16) ; also, 
“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and 


Redemptive Processes Extraordinary. 95 


he that believeth not the Son shall not see life” (John 
iii. 36). Eternal life is the present possession of every 
believer. 6 

Nor does it mean spiritual life as opposed to spiritual 
death, for Paul says, “You hath he quickened who were 
dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. ii. 1). This is regen- 
eration. It can hardly mean the manner of life, or the 
trend and current of conduct and conversation, as mani- 
fested before men in works of righteousness. Christ 
says, “Ye are the light of the world;” “Ve are the salt 
of the earth;” “By their fruits ye shall know them” 
(Matthew v. 13, 14; vii. 16-20). He thus distinguishes 
between the believer and the unbeliever, the righteous and 
the wicked. But it is nowhere taught that believers are 
divided into two classes along this line of the fruits of 
good living. There is an infinite variety in the quantity 
and the quality of their good fruits, but there is no dis- 
tinct line of cleavage to divide believers into two great 
classes according to the measure of their fruit-bearing, 
and probably no mystic has ever claimed such division. 
And yet if there be any Higher Life it certainly ought 
to manifest itself in this way. 

This much is evident, however: the Higher Life sig- 
nifies in the mouths of its votaries a subjective spiritual 
condition realized in consciousness as a more blessed form 
or stage of spiritual life than is enjoyed by ordinary be- 
lievers, who, in turn, enjoy a distinctly lower form of 
spiritual life; and that all believers are divided into two 
classes, well marked in the Christian consciousness, but 
not otherwise discernible. Those in the lower life (or 
lower class) know nothing of the Higher Life in their 
experience; nor can know, except as the higher class 
testify of their conscious Higher Life. Those who claim 
the Higher Life include in their claim, as differentiating 


96 Modern Mysticism. 


them from others, some or all of the mystic gifts and 
attainments already discussed, and especially those yet to 
be discussed. 

Suffice it to say that this Higher Life is not exactly a 
gift or attainment, but such an indwelling and inworking 
and informing of the Holy Spirit in the human soul as to 
enable one, by an act of a higher faith, to attain to some 
or all of the gifts claimed by the Mystics. 

It may be well to note here again the Platonic doctrine 
of two circles in the realm of Philosophy — the Esoteric 
and the Exoteric. The Esoteric circle, by meditation and 
by communing with their own souls, enjoyed larger know- 
ledge, higher wisdom, and a more virtuous life than the 
common herd could attain or even comprehend. From 
this source mysticism entered the church, and has re- 
mained in varied garb unto this day. 

We find no authority for any such division of believers, 
into two classes, set forth in the Scriptures. Surely, if 
this division was real, and as important as they would 
have us believe, we would find some recognition of it in 
the Scriptures. But this question recurs, Have we no 
right to make new generalizations from well-ascertained 
facts? Certainly. But we need first to be sure of the 
facts. We may even admit that if the mystic can properly 
lay claim to the attainments now under discussion, he is 
entitled to claim a Higher Life; but spiritual pride, or 
arrogance, or a mere assertion of stich claim on his own 
unattested word, would certainly vitiate it, or, at best, 
place it under suspicion. 

3. The next item to be considered is, The complete sur- 
render of the human will to the divine will. This, in 
their system, is not one of the attainments of the Higher 
Life, but rather a means to that end. It is propounded 
along with faith as the necessary condition of higher 


Redemptive Processes Extraordinary. 97 


attainments, and puts the soul in a receptive attitude, 
without which there can be no infilling of the Spirit, 
second blessing, or complete sanctification. This com- 
plete surrender of the human will makes it possible for 
faith to appropriate these blessings of the Higher Life, 
if, indeed, it is not of the very essence of the Higher Life — 
in the soul. The mystic evangelist exalts faith as a neces- 
sary means in saving the soul and introducing the sinner 
into the lower Christian life; then he offers the Higher 
Life to faith, but in doing so he exhorts mainly to a sur- 
render, a full surrender, a complete surrender of the 
human will to the divine will. 

What do they mean by the surrender of the human will 
to the divine will? The term will 1s used in at least three 
senses; sometimes the volition or final act; sometimes 
the disposition that determines the choice; sometimes the 
disposition, the choice and the act. Now do they claim 


that this is a surrender of the disposition, or of the choice, 


or of the activity and energy; or do they mean a sur- 
render of all these? Then, again, do they mean a per- 
manent condition of the will, or do they mean a single 
act’ There is deep water here. We cannot enter upon 
a philosophic discussion of the doctrine of the will. But 
a few simple propositions: which are self-evident will 
clarify the situation. 

A surrender is an act. An act is a complete act if it be 
an act at all. A surrender of a human will is a surrender 
of a person, and not of some fancied power or faculty of 
the soul. A surrender to the divine will is a surrender 
to a divine person. So that the proposition means nothing 
more than this, the surrender of a human person to a 
divine person — of a man to God; and if it be a surren- 
der at all, it cannot be made more full or complete by 


_ calling it so; it can in no sense be partial or conditional, 


98 Modern Mysticism. 


-as often happens among men in the struggles of war, 
when the weakened or vanquished foe stipulates for terms 
of a conditional surrender. 

Now, this surrender is really made when the rebellious 
sinner accepts Jesus Christ as his rightiul King and Lord. 
A true repentance makes no reservation. Christ is ac- 
cepted as he is offered. The surrender is complete and 
the justification is complete. There is no half-way house. 
here, at which the ordinary believer tarries in the low- 
grounds of a partial redemption till by another and a 
completer surrender he reaches a higher life. Even when 
sinners do surrender to him, it is only when the Holy 
Spirit, enlightening their minds in the knowledge of 
Christ, and renewing their wills, doth persuade and enable 
them to embrace Jesus Christ as he is freely offered to 
us in the gospel. We may be excused, therefore, from 
giving the mystic a monopoly of this doctrine of surren- 
der in order to his attainment of Higher Life. If the 
‘first surrender of the sinner does not put him into the 
Higher Life, how can a second surrender promote him 
into it? 


Se ee ne fe 


CHAPTER XI. 
REDEMPTIVE PROCESSES EXTRAORDINARY. 


4. THE INFILLING OF THE SPIRIT. 
5. COMPLETE SANCTIFICATION. 


4. A Biay next point to consider is the doctrine of the 

Infilling of the Spirit, or the Spirit-Filled Life. 
We must not forget just here the Scripture doctrine of 
the indwelling of the Spirit. 

This indwelling is not an influence, nor a power, nor 
a mere figure of speech to indicate some mysterious po- 
tency, but is personal. The Spirit dwells in every believer 
as a person. We may not say that he dwells less or more 
in one believer than in another, nor in the same believer 
less or more at different times. 

We admit, however, that the terms do seem scriptural. 
Elisabeth and Zacharias were “‘filled with the Holy Ghost, 
and they forthwith prophesied. They were all filled with 
the Holy Ghost at Pentecost. Peter, some days later, 
was filled with the Holy Ghost, and made his celebrated 
and inspired defence before Annas, Caiaphas and the Sad- 
ducees. When Paul and Barnabas were expelled from 
Antioch in Pisidia they left the disciples filled with the 
Holy Ghost. In none of these cases is there any reference 
to a Higher Life, or to superior graces, but to those 
charisms of the Spirit already noted, and in which the 
early church abounded. Bezaleel and Aholiab were filled 
with the Spirit of God, and became inspired workmen 
for making everything needed in the tabernacle, and so 
in other places, to indicate inspiration and supernatural 


" power. 


100 | Modern Mysticism. 


Equivalent expressions are also used in many places, 
such as the “Spirit of God came upon Balaam,” “upon 
Saul,” “upon Amasai,” and they prophesied; the pouring 
out of the Spirit, baptism with the Spirit, the entering 
of the Spirit, bound in the Spirit, pressed in Spirit, and 
such like; these all indicated either inspiration or super- 
natural power, or both, and in not a single case pointed 
to a so-called “Spirit-filled life.” 

There is one other passage (Eph. v. 18-21) on which 
the whole doctrine is hung: “Be not drunk with wine 
wherein is excess, but be ye filled with the Spirit.” We 
have been taught that it is not safe to hang a doctrine on 
a single text, for it may mean something else. Now, this 
text does mean something else. Let us examine it. There 
are two contrasts in the entire passage — “Be not drunk 
with wine,” but “be ye filled with the Spirit.” This can- 
not mean filled full of the Spirit, for this would require 
the use of the genitive case, but we have the instrumental 
dative in hellenistic form. The meaning, then, is, ‘Be ye 
filled, gorged, satiated with the Spirit.” We now have 
the vivid contrast, “Be not drunk with wine,” but “be ye 
drunk with the Spirit.’’. This exposition suggests a strik- 
ing analogy between drunkenness with wine and drunk- 
enness with the Spirit. They both exhibit characteristic 
ecstacies. Scoffers at Pentecost witnessed the ecstasies, 
and said these men are full of new wine; Peter said, 
“These are not drunk, as you may perceive.” “But this is 
that which was spoken by the prophet Joel.” He might 
have said these ecstasies are not fulness of wine, but they 
are wrought by the fulness of the Spirit. The production 
of ecstasies by the Spirit was entirely familiar to the Jew- 
ish mind. Read the account of Saul meeting a company 
of prophets in the midst of their ecstasies, and how he 
fell into the same ecstatic extravagances, if you choose 


Pine? ee co ne ee eee 


Ds AO 


Ee ae ee ne 


Redemptive Processes Extraordinary. 101 


to call them so. This happened a second time to him, 
and also to the messengers he sent to arrest David at 
Naioth. ; 

We are now ready to note the second contrast, the con- 
trast of these two ecstasies. “Be not drunk with wine 
wherein is excess.” The word rendered “excess” signifies 
the riotous and profligate ecstasy of the Baccanalian revel. 
This is the exact result of being drunk with wine, or, as 
it is expressed in Acts, “filled with wine.” 

But be ye filled with the Spirit, satiated with the Spirit, 
drunk with the Spirit, if you please. This fulness has its 
ecstasy well described in verses 19-21. “Speaking to 
yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, sing- 
ing and making melody in your hearts to the Lord; giv- 
ing thanks always for all things unto God and the Father 
in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ; submitting your- 
selves one to another in the fear of God.” What a noble 
ecstasy is this, inspiring and elevating, carrying us some- 
times to the third heaven in its transports. It was this 
ecstasy that enabled Paul and Silas to sing praises to 
God at midnight in the depths of a Roman dungeon. It 
was this that enabled tender women to clap their hands 
and sing for joy while the fagots blazed around them till 
they passed into the open heaven in a very chariot of 
fire. How much better than the maudlin song and revel 
of the drunkard is all this. Wesley and Whitfield trained 
their people in these ecstasies of the Spirit, and for one 
hundred years Methodism, with its gospel hymns and 
songs, and its abandon, and often its delirium of religious 
joy, won myriads of sinners to Christ. And all the 
churches of Christ in all ages, and to-day more than ever, 
have tasted the preciousness of this infilling of the Spirit 
in these appropriate manifestations. 

We may be permitted to thank God that these things 


102 Modern Mysticism. 


are not the heritage of a favored few as part of a Higher 
Life. Every believer who sings the songs of Zion with 
the Spirit, and with the understanding also, “singing and 
making melody unto God with grace in their hearts,” is 
filled with the Spirit in the true and proper sense. “1 
these things constitute the Higher Life, then this Higher 
Life belongs to us all. There is here no hint of a Higher 
Life, a second blessing, or sinless perfection of any grade. 

s. There remains one head of the mystic’s faith to be 
examined — Immediate and Complete Sanctification — 
sometimes called the second blessing. They call regenera- 
tion and forgiveness of sins the first blessing, and com- 
plete sanctification the second blessing. 

Here, again, is the usual lack of definition. The mys- 
tics use the term sanctification to mean personal holiness, 
both of heart and life. They say that it is obtained in 
answer to the prayer of faith, suddenly and completely, 
as in justification and adoption. 

The orthodox and traditional doctrine is well expressed 
in these words, “Sanctification is a work of God’s free 
grace, whereby we are renewed in the whole man after 
the image of God, and are enabled more and more to die 
unto sin and live unto righteousness.” This is substan- 
tially the doctrine of all evangelical churches. The Ro- 
manist confounds justification and sanctification, and thus 
gives a wider scope to the mystic. There are several uses 
of the terms sanctify, saint, sanctification, holy, holiness, 
righteous, perfect, upright, and such like, in the Scrip- 
tures, and much error arises from confounding things 
that are radically different, though in some respects 
cognate. | 

These terms are used numerously in the Scriptures, 
but do not express sinless perfection, though the mystics 
do quote them to support their contention for a sinless 


Ie se a ot mei nT ee ee ae ee ee a 


Redemptive Processes Extraordinary. 103 


perfection or complete sanctification. For example, Noah 
and David are called perfect, but were not sinless. Job 
was perfect, but not sinless. Paul addresses Hebrew 
Christians as “holy brethren.” They were hardly sinless. 
He addresses the saints at Ephesus, and speaks of the 
poor saints at Jerusalem, and we are constrained to be- 
lieve that all Christians are entitled to these names, holy, . 
saints, perfect, righteous, upright, and the like, im a true 
and proper sense — but not in the sense of a sinless per- 
fection. “If a man say that ‘he hath no sin, he deceiveth 
himself, and the truth is not in him.” ‘No mere man 
since the fall is able to keep the whole law perfectly, but 
doth daily break it in thought, word and deed.” This 
accords with the creed of all evangelical churches, and 
even the mystic, who lays claim to a sinless perfection, 
asserts the truth of this doctrine for the common herd 
of believers. They admit that the Scriptures do indicate 
a progressive sanctification for such believers, but that a 
complete and instantaneous sanctification is also offered 
as far better. 

They emphasize consecration as the ground idea in 
sanctification. The ‘tabernacle and its furniture were con- 
secrated by the sprinkling of blood, and they became holy 
by the act of consecration. So Aaron and his sons and 
their garments were consecrated and became holy to the 
Lord. It was a completed thing, and was in no sense a 
progressive holiness. Let us, however, examine these 
cases of holiness. The tabernacle and furniture and the 
priestly vestments did not consecrate themselves, but they 
were consecrated by Moses, and they received no intrinsic 
holiness thereby. Aaron and his sons did not consecrate 
themselves, but were consecrated by Moses, and they were 
holy, completely holy, in the sense that they were set 
apart for God in the priesthood, but this consecration se- 


104 Q Modern Mysticism. 


-cured them no complete personal and intrinsic holiness, 
for two of his sons were cut off on the eighth day for 
drunkenness during their official service. There is a 
proper sense in which every believer is set apart by bap- 
tism and by the blood of Christ —the blood of sprink- 
ling — with a complete consecration, and we are made his 
saints, his sanctified ones, and every believer is holy to 
the Lord. Even here there is no reference to personal 
character. The infant children of believers are holy in 
this sense, with no necessary reference to the dispositions 
of the soul, or to holiness of heart and life. In all these 
and similar cases the sanctification was complete. 

Any attempt to argue from such a holiness, which ex- 
presses only the relation of a person or a thing to God 
as being wholly his, without question or rival, would cer- 
tainly be misleading. | 

Personal holiness, holiness of heart and life, is a very 
different thing. Holiness is one of the divine attributes, 
and while we may not define it, we know what is meant 
when we say “God is holy.” Holiness is essential to his 
very existence as God, and pervades his every activity. 

God made man in his own image, in knowledge, right- 
eousness and true holiness. He did not give man any 
part of the divine nature or essence, but he created him 
with disposition and character like his own — knowledge, 
righteousness and true holiness. These three stand in 
necessary relations to each other, as we shall presently see. 

By the fall knowledge was blurred and lost, righteous- 
ness broken down and true holiness defiled and corrupted. 
By the fall came spiritual death — total depravity — all 
unrighteousness, and whatever else the Scriptures call it. 

The gospel is the God-given remedy for all this wreck 
and ruin. After the sinner is regenerated by the Spirit, 
quickening in him the lost spiritual life, and after he is 


Redemptive Processes Extraordinary. 105 


born again a babe in Christ, and his sins are forgiven ; 
and after he has been adopted as a son into that one 
family which is named of Christ; then begins his growth 
to the stature of a full-grown man in Christ Jesus — then 
begins the repair of the wreck and ruin of sin — then 
begins the restoration of the knowledge, righteousness 
and true holiness in which he was created. Now, is this. 
a work and a process, or is it a sovereign act of the Spirit, 
restoring at once all that was lost? 

It was entirely competent for God in Christ and by the 
Spirit to make a complete restoration in this way. In fact, 
dying infants are saved in this way. We hold, further, 
that the souls of all believers are at their death made 
perfect in holiness and do immediately pass into glory. 
This shall be accomplished by a sovereign act of the 
Spirit, not achieved by an act of faith and consecration 
in the dying believer, but provided in the covenant of 
redemption. Then, again, the body, corrupted and dis- 
organized and dead by sin, shall be restored into the like- 
ness of the resurrection body of Christ by one supreme 
act of divine power. 

It is, therefore, not a question whether God was not 
able to give a complete sanctification in this life, but this 
is the real question, Is this the divine method as revealed 
in the Scriptures? 

Now, the mystic does not deny that the infant is saved 
in the way we have indicated; nor does he deny that the 
ordinary believer is at death made perfect in holiness, nor 
does he deny that the redemption of the body will be 
consummated at the resurrection. Now, these three great 
consummations at and after death, or at the end of earthly 
life, when the Lord shall come in clouds and great glory, 
do raise the presumption that no man is made perfect in 
holiness in this life. 

The only question in debate with the mystic is, whether 


106 Modern Mysticism. 


perfect holiness, complete sanctification, is attainable in 
this life, and whether failure to attain it is caused by the 
ignorance and unbelief of the average Christian. 

After the discussion had already touching the Higher 
Life, Full Surrender and Infilling of the Spirit, we cannot 
allow the mystic to take refuge behind these so-called 
doctrines to set up his claims to a possible complete sanc- 
tification in this life. But we shall consider some other 
pleas for his doctrine. 

But let us analyze the contention a little further. Does 
the mystic mean, by complete sanctification, perfection in 
holiness? The more ignorant propagandists say, yes, with 
great boldness. The more cultured and cautious say, not 
exactly, but deliverance from all known sin, or rather, 
from all conscious sin; but as knowledge increases there 
is further deliverance from a wider revelation of sin, and 
from its previously undiscovered dominion in the heart. 
This is a confession that true holiness and knowledge 
are intimately connected, and that ignorance and sin are 
closely related; and it follows that there can be no per- 
fection in holiness without perfection in knowledge. 

Again, are sinful dispositions and desires cured by this 
complete sanctification? Some say, yes. Then, how about 
unrecognized sinful dispositions? Some say, no. Then, 
how shall they escape sins of the heart? It would be 
necessary to ignore heart sins, and make sin to consist 
only in the overt act. 

Again, Is this complete sanctification permanent? Some 
say, yes. This would tend to carnal security in the face 
of temptation. Others say, no, it may be lost by sin and 
unbelief. Then it must be lost by unconscious sin and 
unbelief, for he is delivered from conscious sin by the 
complete sanctification which he may lose by sin and un- 
belief. 


Once more, Is not the condition of this complete sanc- 


Redemptive Processes Extraordinary. 107 


tification an unreserved consecration of the whole man 
and all the powers to God’s service? This is the very 
shibboleth of the holiness preacher. It is not far to see 
that this is but a catchy statement of the doctrine of the 
full surrender already discussed. Paul cried, when 
stricken down in the way, “Lord, what wilt thou have me 
to do?” Every new-born soul may sing: 
‘Thee my new Master now I call 
And consecrate to thee my all.”’ 


There remains now nothing to be considered but this 
special plea, Why are we exhorted to be perfect, holy and 
pure if it is not attainable in this life? Does God require 
impossibilities? We answer in part: all God’s people are 
called perfect, upright, righteous, holy, sanctified, and 
saints. If these names mean sinless perfection, then none 
of us are sinners — all sinless. 

But it is urged again, The Scriptures say, “Be ye holy, 
as God is holy;” “Be ye perfect, as your Father in heaven 
is perfect.” To this there is one sufficient answer: this 
is a sinless standard which he sets before his people, and, 
in the very nature of the case, he could present us no 
lower ideal, no lower standard, to reach after. It is the 
same standard which has been presented from Genesis 
to Revelation. And he gives us assurance that we shall 
attain it in the end, “growing in grace and the knowledge 
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” “dying more and 
more unto sin, and living more and more unto righteous- 
ness.” 

Shall we not say with Paul, “Brethren, I count not 
myself to have apprehended; but this one thing I do, 
forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching 
forth unto those things which are before, I press toward 


the mark of the prize of the high calling of God in Christ 
Jesus,” 


CHAPTER XII. 
SUMMARIES. 
Summary I. 


N discussing the claims of Modern Mysticism and their 
doctrine of the Spirit’s work beyond what every be- 

liever receives and enjoys, it has been necessary to tra- 
verse much fundamental truth. 

1. We have seen that the doctrine of the Trinity is the 
doctrine of both Testaments, and that the three persons 
have definite relations to each other from eternity, which 
seem to be grounded in the divine essence. 

2. We have seen that all the revealed activities of this 
Triune God are properly called the Supernatural, as op- 
posed to the activities of created beings, all of which are 
called the natural. ‘The Supernatural has been classified 
under five heads, Creation, Providence, Inspiration, Mira- 
cle, and the Redemptive. 

3. We ‘have seen that these various activities belong 
to the Godhead in common in a proper sense, but that 
there has been a distribution to the several persons of 
the Trinity, corresponding to their relations to each other. 
We have seen that the Spirit perfects and completes that 
which originated with the Father and is administered by 
the Son... 

4. This has been true of all forms of the Supernatural 
from the beginning, and will be true till the final con- 
summation of all things. In order to any right appre- 
hension of the Spirit’s work and functions, they must be 
differentiated from those of the Father and Son. 

s. The work of the Spirit in Creation and Providence, 


Summaries. 109 


and the extent of it, need not be fully considered in this 
discussion, and the mystic holds no peculiar views here, 
unless he be a pantheist. The modern mystic is not a 
pantheist, and if he were, the discussion of his philosophy 
would not belong to the trend of this discussion. 

6. The work of the Spirit is confessedly very promi- 
nent in Inspiration, Miracle, and the Redemptive pro- 
cesses. These three are not only clearly distinguishable 
from each other, but each has its definite place in the 
economy of grace. Inspiration furnishes a divine mes- 
sage; Miracle attests the messenger and the message. 
These two date back to the beginning, and certainly con- 
tinued down to the close of the cannon. They were both 
wrought on occasion, and were not acquired by faith and 
prayer, and were in no sense the index of character or of 
any superior holiness. 

7. The Redemptive processes are wrought by the Spirit, 
subjectively, in the soul of man, and include all the pro- 
cesses of a personal salvation from the first awakening 
of the sinner to see the truth till final perfection in glory, 
and are manifested here in the graces of the Spirit and_ 
in the fruits of good living. 

These redemptive processes have been the same, and 
always will be the same, for every redeemed sinner from 
Abel to the last trophy of divine grace. They are, and 
have always been, assured to every repenting sinner and 
believing saint by promise, by covenant, and by uniform 
administration, which last is the most definite and satis- 
factory form of covenant. 

8. We have seen that inspiration and miracle are no part 
of personal salvation and a complete salvation. The 
mystic, however, claims his right and title to more than 
is included in the ordinary redemptive processes of the 
' Spirit, which every believer enjoys. To justify his claims, 


110 Modern Mysticism. 


-he quotes the formal promises and covenants given by 
Christ concerning the Spirit’s work, and claims them all 
as the heritage of the church to-day. 

9. We have considered all these covenants and all their 
details, and find some of them limited and temporary, 
expiring by limitation with the apostles and their genera- 
tion; and that nothing of those details remain to the 
church except those redemptive processes which are 
common to every believer. 

10. The mystic’s special claims all spring out of a 
common root. Failing to differentiate that which was 
limited and temporary in the covenants of the Spirit from 
that which was permanent and universal, they claim all 
as the Christian heritage throughout this dispensation. 
If we accept the limitations which have been pointed out, 
the mystic has nothing left to base his special claims upon. 

11. We have classified these. special claims, and find 
that they are all based upon those provisions of the cove- 
nants of the Spirit which were limited and temporary, and 
which were not the heritage of believers, as such, even 
when received and enjoyed most widely. 

12. Recognizing the difficulties of the situation, the 
mystic seeks to sustain his claims, in whole or in part, 
by other Scriptures, by an allegorizing exegesis, and by 
special pleas, all of which we have shown to be futile. 

13. When they quote and misapply the Scripture war- 
rants they corrupt the Word of God. When they dis- 
parage the ordinary gracious operations of the Spirit 
which he works in every believer they sit in judgment 
upon him and his gracious methods. When they claim 
the conscious personal witness of the Spirit to numerous 
things in their inner consciousness, they do exalt their 
own subjective conceits above that which is written. 
When they lay on hands or anoint with oil, and promise 


ae 


a aE Ta” NS i te etl SO I ae 


ae ee ee 


Summaries. Lil 


divine healing in answer to their prayer of faith, it is only 
presumption. And when they claim a higher life, a second 
blessing, and complete sanctification, they either deceive 
themselves with strifes about words, or else they deny the 
experience of the saints of all ages, and contradict the 
teaching of Scripture everywhere. And so, also, we may 
say of their claims to Enduement with power and a. 
Spirit-filled life. 


Summary II, 


This discussion has been polemic, from the necessities 
of the case. Every polemic discussion seems to minimize 
the truth while refuting error, even though the truth be 
stated ever so carefully at every step. This is especially 
true if the errors refuted have been cherished as of great 
value. 

We have discussed matters which some consider of 
supreme importance; if these be swept away, the mystic 
naturally feels that the foundations are destroyed and 
that nothing is left; and the ordinary reader is liable to 
feel that the work of the Holy Spirit in redemption is 
slighted and belittled, or at least not sufficiently empha- 
sized and exalted. 

It is confessedly notorious that the work of the Spirit 
has not always been clearly defined and emphasized in 
the pulpit and in religious literature. This is partly be- 
cause the doctrine of the indwelling Spirit is mystical, and 
partly because his various functions have not been clearly 
distinguished from each other. 

It is, therefore, pertinent to close this discussion with 
a restatement and summary of the Spirit’s work as it 
remains to the church of Christ, yesterday, to-day, and 
always. 

The following categories set forth the Spirit’s work 


112 Modern Mysticism. 


- in redemption, not scientifically perhaps, but exnaustively, 
each category implying and overlapping the others. It 
is not necessary to set up and defend these several cate- 
gories here, for the mystic does not challenge them, but 
claims even more. . 

1. The Holy Spirit dwells in the heart of every believer. 
This is not an influence, or a power of less or greater 
degree and proportions, but a personal indwelling and a 
permanent indwelling. This is one of the two mystic 
elements in the Christian religion. The vital union of 
Christ and the believer is the other. This, also, is abso- 
lute and permanent. 

2. Christ is said to dwell in the heart of the believer. 
This is not a literal personal indwelling, but by the Word 
and by the Spirit; not by the Word separately, nor by 
the Spirit separately, but by the Word and Spirit con- 
jointly. The indwelling by the Word is also called the 
indwelling by faith. 

3. It is evident, therefore, that the Word is not efh- 
cacious alone, nor is the Spirit efficacious alone, in the 
redemptive processes, and the Scriptures so teach. 

4. Grace and knowledge are correlative, and the Spirit's 
gracious work shall be perfected when knowledge is per- _ 
fected, when “we shall know even as we are known.” 
This embraces the salvation of infants and adults alike. 

s. The Spirit is the paraclete or advocate in the soul, 
representing the divine claims, just as Christ is the advo- 
cate with the Father pleading for us. 

6. His initial work in the redemptive processes is to 
convince of sin, righteousness and judgment. The Word 
without the Spirit is impotent here; and the Spirit con- 
vinces by the Word. nee 

7. Hatred of sin and love of righteousness spring out 
of a heart changed, new created, regenerated, born again, 


Summaries. 113 


renewed. This change is wrought only by the Spirit and 
maintained by his personal indwelling. 

8. Repentance and faith are sister graces and insepara- 
ble, wrought by the Spirit through the Word. Faith in 
Jesus Christ and repentance unto life are his gifts — each » 
a “saving grace.” : 

g. These several things are best expressed in familiar 
formularies : 

“We are made partakers of the redemption purchased 
by Christ, by the effectual application of it to us by his 
Holy Spirit.” 

“The Spirit applieth to us the redemption purchased 
by Christ, by working faith in us, and thereby uniting us 
to Christ in our effectual calling.” 

“EBffectual calling is the work of God’s Spirit, whereby 
convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our 
minds in the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, 
he doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, 
freely offered to us in the gospel.” 

10. When the Spirit has wrought all this, sin has been 
pardoned and justification is complete ; and the believing 
sinner has been adopted into God’s family, and has a 
“right to all the privileges of the sons of God.” 

In all this the believer has life instead of death, is saved 
instead of lost, is justified and not condemned. He has 
the washing of regeneration and the renewal of the Holy 
Ghost, which is the true baptism. There is a proper sense 
in which his salvation is complete and perfect; it cannot 
be undone. He belongs to God, and is holy to the Lord 
by baptism, by covenant, and by purchase. 

ir. But the work of the Spirit has only just begun. 
There is yet no perfected intrinsic holiness of heart and 
life. The babe must grow to manhood; a warfare must 
be accomplished; an abiding character is to be formed. 


114 Modern Mysticism. 


This we call sanctification, and must be wrought by the 
same indwelling Spirit working by and through the truth. 
“Sanctification is the work of God’s free grace, whereby 
we are renewed in the whole man after the image of God, 
and are enabled more and more to die unto sin and live 
unto righteousness.” 

12. The Spirit works in us with a transforming power, 
changing us into the same image from glory to glory 
when we behold as in a glass the glory of the Lord; and 
the Spirit shall add the last touch to the divine image 
when we shall see him as he is. 

13. The Spirit gives us assurance of God’s love accord- 
ing as a weaker or stronger faith lays hold on Christ and 
rests on him. There is another source oi assurance when 
the Holy Ghost sheds abroad the love of God in our 
hearts, and enables us to glory in tribulations also, for 
tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and 
experience hope. ‘These two sources of assurance do 
check and verify each other as against the self-confidence 
of the carnal heart and its counterfeit graces. 

Peace of conscience, joy in the Holy Ghost, and in- 
crease of grace are wrought by him under the same con- 
ditions and in varied measure, all of which we learn from 
Romans v. 1-6. | 

14. Closely allied to these things 1s the witness of the 
Spirit, bearing witness with our spirit that we are the 
children of God. This witness is twofold. All the graces, 
faith, peace, hope, joy and love, and such like, are wrought 
by the Spirit, and just so far as we recognize them in 
exercise, they are the witness of the Spirit. The fruits 
of good living are also wrought by the Spirit, and are 
his witness. So, also, these two do check and verify each 
other. 

15. The indwelling Spirit makes the Word, sacraments 


ee ee ee 


Summaries. T15 


and prayer effectual means of salvation, not by any virtue 
in them, as means of grace. He convinces and converts 
sinners by the Word and builds them up in holiness and 
comfort through faith unto salvation; he helps our in- 
firmities in prayer, teaching us what things we need, and 
making intercession for us; and he represents, seals and 
applies Christ and the benefits of the new covenant to be- 
lievers. 

FEffectual prayer has the mind of the Spirit, and is in 
accordance with the divine will; and this will is revealed 
in the Word so that faith rests on a sure warrant; but in 
other matters in which his will is not revealed we say, 
“Thy will be done.” 

16. The indwelling Spirit shall at death make our souls 
perfect in holiness and meet for the inheritance of the 
saints in light. Shall he not also quicken our mortal 
bodies into the likeness of Christ’s glorious body in that 
great day? 

17. The indwelling Spirit is the earnest, the pledge and 
the seal of the covenant of redemption. The Father origi- 
nated this covenant, the Son administered and executed 
it, and the Spirit applies and perfects it to all generations. 
All that we know of it is revealed in the Scriptures, and 
we may not add to nor detract from the Spirit’s glorious 
work. . 

This summary has been limited to the agency of the 
Spirit in redemptive processes. It is not pertinent here 
to note and classify his agency in the providential govern- 
ment and control of nations and individuals and the direc- 
tion of their destiny. 

It is pertinent to add that the agency of the Spirit 
through the truth is the same, whether one sinner be 
convicted and converted in a day or in a year, or whether 
three thousand be saved in a day, as at Pentecost, or five 


116 Modern Mysticism. 


‘thousand one other day. And so will it be when a “nation 
shall be born in a day.” “Not by might, nor by power, 
but by my Spirit, saith the Lord.” To him be all the 
glory. He uses his people to make known the truth; he 
only can use it to make men wise unto salvation. 


‘Tai 


2 01251 5922 


DATE DU 


. 
} | | r ; tt ) 
au \ | 
D 


pcuvet 


Sayeas | ds porty ah cee rate) De 
dha ore ln bees an vet er 
Srcertaa ares AEN, 
Uae eratesee “nae terre ale . peewee rH) 
act Sanaa tae apy pate gaye ties Ay 
asia Dippin ue 


Stare 


os 
Dat 
.s hi: nial gh 
sels a nls 
i "" , 


cpaoat ihre 
stat ps ees tawy: ie ihe 


eth 
a us? 
bie Lata 


a 
wate suk 1 
oe a thE i ; a} a f $: 
nett ce ninnetits ae ree saa Mate Raa 
Fat tee ial: 4 ! ‘Tha Bit WA ton 
ie nh ve bre iitieseaas ta A Uette + 
atu ieee) mA oars / Masel: 
Bath Sala mterhahy f . 

pie Ricuatee: be 
pie fatty 


‘ 
thy a angie ti 


ea Neres LEA A 


Tyre! 


Aas pas st Mt 


a 


ae Nit 


ta 


Dili tea naga! 


aes 


SE 


ayers 
GTS 
bic Re 


ote HIG 
3 a if 


ecrsraiee 


: 


mi 
Ea 

siasa} 
KE: 


a 


Nite 
an ney 


Bh 


Ae He 
ie ts : 
Baas : mie as ¢ prieitsihe Slee HA 4 
ie RH trek eA A Ht ale 


oy 


er + ‘ Tee Re y 
Seat Cumatatatt oil ip ae “hei na 
- a a ed : 
Hier ae te ta co isi fee patie z pi hea tasty i i * oieisit! ita 


jul 


i on oe ise eet 
iis est i ie ee 
ie Hy het i 


tits Hi 
yeti nd 
tf a z, F 


ins denser ght 

ioe Raa A pacet 

aoa heag seeded any stv erty 
eeeints Lae { force 
war geet ase Pie ou : 


Farias! 

aoe ; feel 
PS tae Risa 
f ee ri} a 4 et 


ft Pius! iviatten tis ae i 

resent ine serge tte } tne isideeud 
Minar is ues +33 paths ea 
" i 


at 
ma 


ie 


i 
5 ; ner ng i 
- deierty ft pin Bich A 
= SS , sae eT Te eaee merge SS Mier egrt He i a. 
gt it at nent 4 
re any ‘ Rtetay F titer teste ah i eM 
sii fiat pic thea } BE Fer ; ite Bott ie Wise 
psi 5 Ha TG 
te TRE Os i fea asa 
ee ee 
Ah wat 


Infekt etal 


eae ceumeeaht 


“en 
inet Satta} ia ea h 
i 


Tres 


it 
oi Haye leant y 
. “ “ tie * i sa 
sate ae i airs jai a ea avait e: 
¢ fotitaiy it pall 4 

are oh fbveyrosul eral Eth iy 

epee peesernent: "f 7 oh bf) F 
i 


test 
panereey rs eTT —— aati “fasts ee redilied feds nite ei poesia te 
Weitehyin wnt aatgatie 


rereuew 
jebeee rank aryrenet 


HORUS teats 


aS tat feces td ee 
te fe te 


issues 34 rire oye! 
rene rere et pote + SEAS 
ss inte treme inane wtahiasecennreivres 
cee renee eB atts A arnt : vapesti 
re We saperbasit inner Me t NS s a 
ex ee wre ye os rape wh 
it pirated a9 4 | ms a ie rote res 
tiene sera ae ved “i meen ia 1 


